Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Supreme Court Toughens Employers’ Obligations to Accommodate Religion

by June 29, 2023
June 29, 2023

Walter Olson

The result of today’s Supreme Court opinion in Groff v. DeJoy is to load private, not just public, employers with new practical burdens in the name of accommodating employees’ religious beliefs. The Court does so by nimbly reinterpreting, as opposed to overturning, the longstanding standard set forth in TWA v. Hardison (1977), which interpreted Title VII as requiring accommodation of this sort by employers only when the costs were “de minimis.” Whatever the standard appropriate for government workplaces, there are high stakes in imposing a standard on private workplaces. Today’s decision leaves private employment relations in America less free.

As Justice Sonia Sotomayor points out in a concurrence joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Congress has consistently passed up the opportunity to adopt a standard more burdensome to employers than Hardison, even though it has not hesitated to revisit and correct many other high court decisions on Title VII workplace discrimination that it saw as mistaken. We may hope that the Court’s newly announced standard, which shifts focus from the question of whether burdens are “de minimis” to that of whether they are “substantial,” will in practice not amount to a drastic change.

Sotomayor makes a further point worth noting in her concurrence. It has been known to happen that a private employer’s compelled acceptance of religious accommodation requests will adversely affect the interests of co‐​workers. While Title VII will not allow these interests to enter into the balance when based on mere animus or prejudice toward a religion, it is legitimate for an employer to weigh other sorts of harm to co‐​workers when they work to impair the management of the workplace. If a workplace divided by differential treatment based on religion or any other identity is a less efficient and unified workplace, it will often be legitimate for employers to say no to that differential treatment.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
“Greedflation” Is an Accounting Identity Not an Economic Explanation
next post
CBO Projects Challenging Fiscal Future in Long‐​Term Budget Outlook

You may also like

School Resource Officers: Is Police Presence in Schools...

July 24, 2023

IG Report Shows Need for Transparency in Government...

July 29, 2024

Recapping the Cato Tax Boot Camp

February 7, 2025

Friday Feature: TwiddleU

May 17, 2024

Should Election Authorities Publish the Records of Individual...

November 29, 2023

How Bad Are Saudi Arabia’s Human Rights Abuses?

October 6, 2023

Can Argentina’s President Milei Afford to Delay Dollarization?

December 14, 2023

Trump’s Toast, Folks

August 16, 2023

Trump Treasury Expands Financial Surveillance

March 13, 2025

How to Skirt Congress, Hide Medicare Costs, and...

October 5, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Schumer to force Senate reading of Trump’s entire ‘big, beautiful bill’

      June 28, 2025
    • Rubio condemns Iran’s ‘unacceptable’ threats against IAEA director

      June 28, 2025
    • Key blue state Republican says Senate’s local tax write-off offer is a ‘good deal’

      June 28, 2025
    • Key GOP senator defects on crucial vote, imperiling Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ in narrow majority

      June 28, 2025
    • Terror in Gaza: Hamas offers bounties to kill US and local aid workers, group says

      June 28, 2025
    • SCOOP: Blue state Republican could oppose Trump tax bill over Medicaid changes

      June 28, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,329)
    • Investing (2,081)
    • Politics (15,851)
    • Stocks (3,177)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved