Discrimination

In a landmark ruling, the US Supreme Court redefines the standard for Title VII lawsuits, stating “some harm” is sufficient. Details in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis.

Thomas More Society attorneys will argue against the Biden Administration and Arconic in a case involving religious discrimination against fired metalworker Daniel Snyder.

US District Court dismisses LGBT student group’s suit against Dept. of Education, ruling religious liberty protections for universities and colleges remains intact. Court states that these protections are essential for the free exercise of religion and should not be interfered with by government.

Why two Maine schools slated to receive public funds in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in Carson v. Makin will probably refuse to take the money. Last week […]

The Supreme Court finds for a Catholic foster care service while sidestepping a larger free exercise of religion issue.

A group of current and former LGBTQ+ students have sued the U.S. Department of Education to either force their colleges, universities, and seminaries to change their policies or to stop providing federal financial assistance.

The ethical and moral onus is now on religious institutions as they decide whether to fire “ministerial” employees for reasons illegal in the secular world, such as age or the need for cancer treatment. Institutions engaging in this kind of discriminatory tactic will still need to answer to a Higher Source who will not be impressed with their ability to obtain summary judgment. The way for religious institutions to “win” these cases is to avoid them in the first place by taking the lead in treating employees with the highest degree of care and concern.

On February 24, 2020, the Supreme court agreed to hear an appeal brought against the city of Philadelphia by Catholic Social Services (CSS). The city has a standing policy of not referring foster children to CSS because CSS will not certify same-sex couples as foster parents.

The Supreme court has decided against hearing a workplace accommodation case involving a Seventh-day Adventist, but hints that it may revisit employer accommodation standards in the future.