Daniel Snyder v. Arconic Corp.

Q: Who won Arconic?

The outcome in Daniel Snyder v. Arconic Corp. was: Pending. The Eighth Circuit heard oral arguments regarding whether an employer's DEI policy can override an employee's religious liberty rights when terminating a Christian worker for expressing religious objections to Pride Month imagery.

Q: What legal issues are involved in Arconic?

Daniel Snyder v. Arconic Corp. involves the following religious liberty issues: Free Exercise, Workplace Accommodation.

The Eighth Circuit heard oral arguments regarding whether an employer’s DEI policy can override an employee’s religious liberty rights when terminating a Christian worker for expressing religious objections to Pride Month imagery.

ReligiousLiberty.TV

February 26, 2026

0 min read

Year: 2024 Outcome: Pending

Free Exercise Workplace Accommodation

Holding: The Eighth Circuit heard oral arguments regarding whether an employer's DEI policy can override an employee's religious liberty rights when terminating a Christian worker for expressing religious objections to Pride Month imagery.

Uses AI to generate a structured summary. Takes ~10 seconds.

Official Documents

No official documents found yet.

Coverage on ReligiousLiberty.TV

📎 Document links found in our articles: 📄 opinion

8th Circuit - EEOC Argues Against Religious Discrimination Claim of Terminated Metalworker April 10, 2024

Referenced

Daniel Snyder v. Arconic Corp. is a Free Exercise case in 2024. The court held that the Eighth Circuit heard oral arguments regarding whether an employer's DEI policy can override an employee's religious liberty rights when terminating a Christian worker for expressing religious objections to Pride Month imagery. The case resulted in a Pending outcome.

1
Mahmoud v. Taylor606 U.S. 522 (2025)
3
U.S. Supreme Court
Parents have a fundamental right to direct the upbringing and medical care of their children without state interference.
📄 Opinion available
2
United States v. Don Lemon(2026)
2
U.S. District Court
Pending
The government indicted Don Lemon under the FACE Act for alleged coordination in disrupting religious worship, though judges…
3
Groff v. DeJoy600 U.S. 447 (2023)
2
U.S. Supreme Court
Employers cannot deny religious accommodation to workers unless it causes substantial increased costs or burdens on business operations.
📄 Opinion available
4
Bill 21 (Supreme Court of Canada Appeal)(2026)
2
U.S. Supreme Court
Pending
5
Troogstad v. City of Chicago25-1575 (2025)
2
Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate how a COVID-19 vaccine mandate burdened their specific religious practices under the Free Exercise…
📄 Opinion available
6
Wailes v. Jefferson County Public Schools(2025)
2
Remanded
District court dismissal of parents' challenge to school's policy of assigning students to overnight accommodations based on gender…
📄 Opinion available
7
Union Gospel Mission of Yakima Washington v. Nick Brown24-7246 (2026)
2
The First Amendment's church autonomy doctrine extends beyond the ministerial exception to protect a religious organization's decision to…
📄 Opinion available
8
Gilfillan v. City of Philadelphia637 F.2d 924 (1980)
2
Philadelphia violated the Establishment Clause by spending taxpayer funds to build a platform for a papal mass and…
📄 Opinion available
9
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.573 U.S. 682 (2014)
2
U.S. Supreme Court
Religious liberty protections under RFRA apply to closely held for-profit corporations.
📄 Opinion available
10
We the Patriots USA, Inc. v. State of Connecticut Department of EducationHHD-CV-22-6152413-S (2025)
2
State Appellate Court
The court dismissed state constitutional claims based on sovereign immunity but allowed a statutory religious liberty claim under…