New York Occasions Op-Ed:  The Newest Campaign to Place Faith Over the Remainder of Civil Society, by Linda Greenhouse:

Federal civil rights legislation requires employers to accommodate their staff’ spiritual wants until the request would impose “undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s enterprise.” Congress didn’t hassle to outline “undue hardship,” so 46 years in the past the Supreme Court docket got here up with a definition of its personal.

An lodging requiring an employer “to bear greater than a de minimis price” — which means a small or trifling price — needn’t be granted, the courtroom mentioned in Trans World Airways v. Hardison. …

Treating faith as nothing notably particular, the choice mirrored the spirit of the occasions however was deeply unpopular in spiritual circles. There have been many makes an attempt over a few years to influence Congress to amend the legislation, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to shift the stability explicitly in favor of religiously observant staff. Between 1994 and 2019, greater than a dozen such payments had been launched. None emerged from Congress.

And so now, a really completely different courtroom from the one which dominated 46 years in the past is about to do the work itself.

That isn’t an idle prediction however fairly the absolutely foreordained final result of the brand new case the justices just lately added to their calendar for choice through the present time period. The enchantment was introduced by a conservative Christian litigating group, First Liberty Institute, on behalf of a former postal employee, Gerald Groff, described as a Christian who regards Sunday as a day for “worship and relaxation.”

Mr. Groff claimed a authorized proper to keep away from the Sunday shifts required throughout peak season on the submit workplace the place he labored. Going through self-discipline for failing to indicate up for his assigned shifts, he give up and filed a lawsuit. The decrease courts dominated towards him, with the Philadelphia-based U.S. Court docket of Appeals for the Third Circuit expressing little question that the disruption and lack of morale Mr. Groff’s absences brought about within the small rural submit workplace the place he labored exceeded the de minimis threshold that the Supreme Court docket’s 1977 precedent requires an employer to show. …

When the courtroom likely guidelines for him later this time period, the choice won’t stand for a vindication of minority rights. It would as an alternative signify the courtroom’s full identification with the motion within the nation’s politics to raise faith over all different parts of civil society.

Whether or not at this time’s Supreme Court docket helps to guide that motion or has been captured by it’s by now inappropriate. Faith is the lens via which the present majority views American society; as I’ve written, there is no such thing as a different solution to perceive the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The endpoint of this mission will not be but in view. These of us not on board are left to observe, to attempt to perceive, and to name the courtroom out with every further step it takes.

Ahead Op-Ed:  A New Case Earlier than the Supreme Court docket Might Make Shabbat Observance Simpler, by Michael Helfand (Pepperdine & Yale):

The Supreme Court docket introduced earlier this month that it’ll hear one more blockbuster church-state case, Groff v. DeJoy. On the core of the case lies a conundrum that has plagued federal legislation for practically half a century: How far should employers go when offering spiritual lodging?

Till now, the courtroom’s interpretation has required little of employers. Unsurprisingly, this place has lengthy roiled, amongst different spiritual minorities, American Jews, who typically discover themselves searching for lodging within the office for spiritual practices resembling observance of Shabbat. In taking the case, the Supreme Court docket has signaled its willingness to revisit its widely-criticized interpretation of current protections, offering optimism to spiritual staff hoping to navigate the competing calls for of religion and work. …

Among the many issues with this prevailing customary is that these left most uncovered by the courtroom’s stingy interpretation of Title VII have been spiritual minorities, whose practices typically don’t monitor the prevailing rhythms of the office. Based on one transient filed earlier than the Supreme Court docket in 2020, practically half of Title VII lodging appeals are filed by spiritual minorities, although these minorities solely account for 15% of the inhabitants. …

Critics extra just lately have puzzled what customary ought to substitute the prevailing customary. Positive, we must always require extra of employers, however how far more? Some have nervous that a regular that grants staff an unfettered proper to spiritual lodging would generate its personal parade of horribles, resembling a police officer’s refusal to guard an abortion clinic or a social employee’s demand to make use of Bible readings, versus psychological well being counseling, to heal jail inmates.

However, in different contexts, the legislation has already discovered a fairly profitable center floor. On the subject of the lodging required pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Act, for instance, undue hardship is interpreted to imply “important issue or expense.” Because of this, employers can’t fulfill their obligation by merely asserting {that a} requested lodging imposes a “de minimis” burden; as an alternative, they have to lengthen themselves additional in searching for to seek out an lodging for these with disabilities, until doing so will truly generate prices or difficulties which can be important. This customary has confirmed workable in relation to lodging below the ADA, offering good purpose to assume it might work as properly within the context of non secular lodging within the office.

Time will inform as to which path the courtroom finally chooses. For now, the courtroom’s choice to listen to Groff v. DeJoy holds out the hope of remedying a longstanding unsuitable and offering individuals of religion within the office with extra expanded protections. Correctly balanced, these types of lodging will hopefully present a center floor, making certain that the price of getting into the workforce needn’t be the discarding of 1’s religion commitments.

Editor’s Word:  If you want to obtain a weekly e-mail every Sunday with hyperlinks to the religion posts on TaxProf Weblog, e-mail me right here.

https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2023/02/how-far-employers-must-go-in-providing-religious-accommodations-to-employees.html