Patterson v. Walgreen

Q: What court decided Walgreen?

Patterson v. Walgreen was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2019.

Q: What is the citation for Walgreen?

The official citation for Patterson v. Walgreen is 18-349.

Q: Who won Walgreen?

The outcome in Patterson v. Walgreen was: Pending. The Court will decide whether the di minimis definition of 'undue hardship' from TWA v. Hardison will remain in place in a case involving a Seventh-day Adventist terminated for refusing to work on Saturday.

Q: What legal issues are involved in Walgreen?

Patterson v. Walgreen involves the following religious liberty issues: Free Exercise, Workplace Accommodation.

The Court will decide whether the di minimis definition of 'undue hardship' from TWA v. Hardison will remain in place in a case involving a Seventh-day Adventist terminated for refusing to work on Saturday.

ReligiousLiberty.TV

February 26, 2026 1 min read

Cite This Case

Patterson v. Walgreen, No. 18-349 (U.S. 2019).

✓ Copied! Standard law review / practitioner format. Verify against current Bluebook edition (21st ed.).

Patterson v. Walgreen, No. 18-349 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2019). https://religiousliberty.tv/case-library/patterson/

✓ Copied! For legal scholarship in social science journals. Includes URL back to this case page.

Patterson v. Walgreen (No. 18-349) [U.S. Supreme Court, 2019] — The Court will decide whether the di minimis definition of 'undue hardship' from TWA v. Hardison will remain in place in a case involving a Seventh-day Adventist terminated for refusing to work on Saturday. Source: ReligiousLiberty.TV (https://religiousliberty.tv/case-library/patterson/, accessed July 22, 2026).

✓ Copied! For general audiences, journalism, press releases, and non-legal writing.

Citation: 18-349 Year: 2019 Court: U.S. Supreme Court Outcome: Pending

Free Exercise Workplace Accommodation

Holding: The Court will decide whether the di minimis definition of 'undue hardship' from TWA v. Hardison will remain in place in a case involving a Seventh-day Adventist terminated for refusing to work on Saturday.

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

Official Documents

📄 Read Opinion Article link

Coverage on ReligiousLiberty.TV

📎 Document links found in our articles: 📄 SupremeCourt.gov opinion

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Workplace Religious Accommodation Cases April 6, 2021

Brief mention
Justices hint interest in revisiting Title VII religious accommodation while declining to hear football coach prayer case January 30, 2019

Cited as context 📎 SupremeCourt.gov opinion 📎 SupremeCourt.gov PDF
Supreme Court Requests Solicitor General's Opinion on Sabbath Accommodation Case March 28, 2019

Primary coverage 📎 SupremeCourt.gov opinion

Patterson v. Walgreen (18-349) is a Free Exercise case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2019. The court held that the Court will decide whether the di minimis definition of 'undue hardship' from TWA v. Hardison will remain in place in a case involving a Seventh-day Adventist terminated for refusing to work on Saturday. The case resulted in a Pending outcome.