RSS
Groff v. DeJoy is the rare Supreme Court decision that every Jew can celebrate
(JTA) — In one of its most anticipated cases of the year, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Groff v. DeJoy last month, significantly expanding the federal protections afforded religious employees in the workplace. The decision itself was unanimous, reflecting a broad consensus that employers should be doing more than previously required when it comes to accommodating religious employees.
Jewish organizations from across the ideological spectrum — from Agudath Israel and the Orthodox Union to the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee to the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism — applauded the ruling as providing long-elusive workplace protections. This new ruling will no longer allow employers to avoid providing accommodations simply because it comes at some minimal cost. Employers will now have to prove such costs are substantial when considered in the broader context of their business.
When Gerald Groff took his job at the U.S. Postal Service, he was not required to work on Sundays. However, after the Postal Service subsequently entered an agreement to deliver packages for Amazon on Sundays, Groff was informed that he could no longer take off on his Sunday Sabbath, as was his custom, which ultimately led to his termination.
The crux of the case revolved around two words in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: “undue hardship.” According to the text of Title VII, employers are required to accommodate the religious practices of their employees, but only if providing such an accommodation does not present an “undue hardship” to their business. In this way, federal law balances the religious needs of the employee against the business necessities of the employer. And the words “undue hardship,” at least on their face, imply that the employers are expected to endure some hardship in order to accommodate religious employees, but that obligation ends once the hardship to the employer’s business becomes “undue.”
While the text of the law appears to impose modest, but important obligations on employers, the Supreme Court — back in a 1977 case, TWA v. Hardison — provided a contorted interpretation of Title VII that required far less of employers. Somewhat counterintuitively, the Court appeared to hold that providing a religious accommodation imposed an “undue hardship” on the employer any time it required the employer to “bear more than a de minimis cost” — that is, a trivial or minor cost. As a result, if an employer could demonstrate a religious accommodation entailed even a trivial cost, she was off the hook. The court’s decision in Hardison rejected an employee’s claim to have his Sabbath accommodated.
Hardison’s stingy standard, and its significant consequences for American Jews in the workplace, is precisely why so many Jewish organizations with varying political outlooks – including the Anti-Defamation League, American Jewish Committee, National Jewish Commission on Law and Public Affairs, National Council of Young Israel, Orthodox Union (full disclosure: I co-authored the Orthodox Union’s amicus brief), and the Zionist Organization of America — all filed amicus briefs before the Court in Groff. As these briefs emphasized, the lack of meaningful protections for religious employees had, over the years, repeatedly forced American Jews to choose between their faith and their livelihood, most notably when it came to observing the Sabbath and Jewish holidays.
But in Groff, the Supreme Court overhauled the standard for employers: According to the decision, an employer must accommodate a religious employee unless doing so imposes “a burden [that] is substantial in the overall context of an employer’s business.” (Emphasis added.)
So what does this all mean for the future of religious accommodation in the workplace?
As the solicitor general noted during oral arguments, there are three broad categories where employees typically seek religious accommodations: scheduling changes such as those required to facilitate Sabbath observance; dress and grooming policies such as kippahs and hijabs in the workplace; and religious expression in the workplace, which might include an employee’s desire to display (or avoid) some sort of religious symbol or message.
Under the new standard, employers who seek to reject such requests will have to demonstrate that granting these religious accommodations would impose substantial costs. Considerations like administrative costs and modest financial expenditures will be insufficient justification for denying such requests. This impact will likely be felt most directly when it comes to requests to accommodate Sabbath observances. The Court’s opinion indicates that employers will have to consider voluntary shift swaps and modest incentives — such as overtime payments — in order to accommodate a Sabbath-observing employee.
Importantly, this will vary significantly by occupation. For example, while a postal worker might reasonably request time off for the Sunday Sabbath, a coach in the NFL, where games are mostly played on Sundays, cannot.
Similarly, determining whether the financial burdens of accommodation are truly significant will also depend on context. Costs that might be significant for a local grocery store may not be significant for a corporate behemoth like Amazon. Those differences will matter when deciding how much an employer will have to expend when accommodating a particular religious practice.
Finally, the court emphasized that accommodations that trigger deep dissatisfaction from employees — and thereby significantly affect the employer’s business — can qualify as a substantial cost and justify an employer’s decision to deny an accommodation. But the court was careful to constrain these sorts of considerations: An employer cannot claim that she can’t accommodate a religious employee because other employees have expressed dissatisfaction that is based upon their “animosity to a particular religion, to religion in general, or to the very notion of accommodating religious practice.” To countenance such bias or hostility would undermine the very purposes of the law — and, in the words of the court, put Title VII “at war with itself.”
To be sure, the significance of Groff is somewhat blunted given that many states have already adopted heightened standards for when religious employees must be accommodated. Before Groff, many employees could still leverage state law protections to secure accommodations. An amicus brief filed by 22 states noted that states with broader protections had not faced significant challenges in administering such legal regimes.
Still, the court’s decision will likely provide long overdue protections to religious employees — fulfilling the long-overdue promise of Title VII. Most notably, the decision likely ensures that religious minorities — whose observances are often out of step with the rhythm of the modern workplace — need not cast aside their religious commitments as the price of employment.
This new standard is mindful of context and careful not to require substantial costs that might undermine a business. At the same time, the court’s decision is clear that employers cannot hide behind minor inconveniences to ignore the requests of their religious employees.
In sum, the court’s decision in Groff — and unanimously so — asks employers and employees to find workable solutions to conflicts between business objectives and faith commitments. In that way, it may provide a useful blueprint for navigating a host of recurring social conflicts across the human condition.
—
The post Groff v. DeJoy is the rare Supreme Court decision that every Jew can celebrate appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
RSS
Germany’s Chancellor: ‘Anyone Who Incites Antisemitism Must Expect to Be Prosecuted’
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz addresses the lower house of parliament, the Bundestag, in a government statement about current security issues in Berlin, Germany, June 6, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Annegret Hilse
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Thursday condemned the ongoing discrimination faced by the Jewish community, calling it “outrageous and shameful.”
Scholz emphasized that combating antisemitism is a task for all citizens, highlighting its growing importance amid “increasingly shameless attempts to normalize far-right positions.”
The German leader was speaking at an event organized by the International Auschwitz Committee, which was formed by survivors of the infamous Nazi death camp to promote Holocaust education and fight discrimination, during a ceremony in Berlin ahead of the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz on Monday.
The Holocaust is “a responsibility that each and every one of us bears in our country,” regardless of religion or family history, Scholz said.
Approximately 6 million Jews were killed during the Holocaust, with about 1 million of them murdered at Auschwitz before its liberation by Soviet troops on Jan. 27, 1945.
“They were gassed, shot, they died of hunger, forced labor, and medical experiments,” Scholz said. These were “more than a million unique people, individuals, wives and husbands, boys and girls, grandmothers and grandfathers.”
He also honored other Holocaust victims, including Sinti and Roma, political opponents of the Nazi regime, homosexuals, the sick, and people with disabilities.
“Anyone who supports terrorism, anyone who incites antisemitism must expect to be prosecuted,” Scholz said at the event.
Germany has experienced a sharp spike in antisemitism since the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, amid the ensuing war in Gaza. In just the first six months of 2024 alone, the number of antisemitic incidents in Berlin surpassed the total for all of the prior year and reached the highest annual count on record, according to Germany’s Federal Association of Departments for Research and Information on Antisemitism (RIAS).
The figures compiled by RIAS were the highest count for a single year since the federally-funded body began monitoring antisemitic incidents in 2015, showing the German capital averaged nearly eight anti-Jewish outrages a day from January to June last year.
According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), police registered 5,154 antisemitic incidents in Germany in 2023, a 95 percent increase compared to the previous year.
However, experts believe that the true number of incidents is much higher but not recorded because of reluctance on the part of the victims.
“Only 20 percent of the antisemitic crimes are reported, so the real number should be five times what we have,” Felix Klein, the German federal government’s chief official dealing with antisemitism, told The Algemeiner in an interview in 2023.
On Thursday, Scholz denounced recent attacks on individuals due to their beliefs, gender, or skin color.
“This fight for the inviolability of the dignity of each and every individual continues,” he said. “Our responsibility, 80 years on, is to resist this hatred.”
On Monday, a service will be held at Auschwitz to mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which Germany has observed since 1996.
The event will be attended by Britain’s King Charles, French President Emmanuel Macron, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Scholz, and German Vice-Chancellor Robert Habeck.
At the 75th anniversary of the Nazi death camp’s liberation, more than 100 Auschwitz survivors participated in the celebrations in person. Steinmeier has now invited several survivors to travel to the camp for the upcoming event, with fewer than 50 expected to attend.
“There are fewer and fewer,” Steinmeier’s office said. “It is a special feature of the meeting that it will be one of the last with survivors.”
The post Germany’s Chancellor: ‘Anyone Who Incites Antisemitism Must Expect to Be Prosecuted’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Virginia Democrats Block Jewish Civil Rights Attorney’s Appointment to University Board
George Mason University students walking across campus on December 12, 2024. Photo: Dion J. Pierre/The Algemeiner
Democrats in Virginia have launched an effort to block several appointees of Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin, including a Jewish civil rights attorney who was picked for an important post at George Mason University (GMU) that would see him continue reforming the school’s handling of antisemitism.
In the summer of 2024, Youngkin selected Kenneth Marcus — chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, former assistant US secretary of education for civil rights, and one the most consequential litigants in the fight to eradicate campus antisemitism — to serve on GMU’s Board of Visitors, a role in which he has addressed longstanding issues affecting Jewish GMU students, including recent threats to their safety that were widely reported in the media.
However, Marcus’ appointment came while Virginia’s General Assembly, a bicameral legislature which has the final say on gubernatorial appointees, was in recess. While he served in the unpaid role, it was never confirmed by lawmakers. That left the door open for his appointment to be rejected, the first steps towards which took place earlier this week when Senate Democratic members of the privileges and elections committee, a body which oversees appointments and submits them to the General Assembly for a final vote, removed his name from a joint resolution containing the names of appointees whose confirmation is pending.
Their reasons for opposing the decorated attorney’s appointment to Virginia’s largest public university remain unknown, as no arguments enumerating concerns about Marcus’ beliefs, conduct, or political affiliations have been put forth.
The Democrats’ opposition to his appointment came as a surprise, Marcus, a native of northern Virginia, told The Algemeiner on Thursday during an interview.
“No one in the Virginia Senate reached out to me to express any concerns, so I don’t know what the issue is. There is nothing that I have done during my tenure at George Mason that has been particularly controversial other than that I have been both active and outspoken in addressing antisemitism,” Marcus explained. “It would be disturbing if my work on antisemitism has been controversial with the General Assembly because the actions that we’ve been taking have been both legally required and necessary.”
He continued, “What’s happening at George Mason is deeply concerning, and there has absolutely been a need to take serious action. That work has been important, but it is also ongoing and is by no means done. Much, much more needs to be done.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, George Mason University has been the center of two investigations involving the potential for mass casualty events motivated by antisemitism.
In December, a GMU student was permanently trespassed and arrested in Falls Church, Virginia for allegedly planning to manufacture a weapon of mass destruction for use in a jihadist attack on Israel’s General Consulate in New York City. FBI agents apprehended the student, GMU freshman and Egyptian expatriate Abdullah Ezzeldin Taha Mohamed Hassan, after he had allegedly discussed his plot, in which he considered a variety of options for creating as many Jewish casualties as possible, with an undercover informant.
Hassan’s case was the second time in less than a month that GMU students were arrested due to suspicion that they were preparing to commit a mass casualty event.
Earlier that month, the university criminally trespassed and suspended two siblings — the current co-president and former president of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) — after a law enforcement search of their off-campus home uncovered “four weapons unsecured, along with more than 20 magazines with 30 bullets each,” Hamas paraphernalia, and “arm patches” which said “kill them where they stand” — a phrase others have translated as “kill Jews where they stand.”
Additionally, George Mason University is currently under investigation for a series of antisemitic incidents which took place on campus after Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel. In one widely reported outrage, a pro-Hamas student stormed through the campus tearing down posters of missing Israeli hostages who were kidnapped by Hamas. That student was filmed, and when an attempt was made to expose their identity, the university accused the student who captured the hateful behavior of doxxing and suggested that he could be punished. At the time, many Jewish students said that the idea that the university would discipline anyone for unmasking antisemites is startling and disreputable.
Given the immensity of the issues that remain to be addressed, Marcus hopes that “cooler heads will prevail” in the General Assembly. He recognizes, however, that they may not.
“I have to think that cooler heads will prevail and that the General Assembly assembly will change course, but I don’t know that,” he said. “There’s still time and I know that many people are having conversations and that’s a healthy part of the process. I am a volunteer part-time public servant asking questions and trying to make sure that George Mason students are well educated and kept safe. If my name is not restored presumably that means that my tenure would end and I would not receive answers to the questions I’ve been asking and would no longer have an opportunity to work to protect George Mason University and its students.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Virginia Democrats Block Jewish Civil Rights Attorney’s Appointment to University Board first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘Punishment of Bullets’: Hamas Executes 11 Palestinians Accused of ‘Collaborating’ With Israel
Hamas terrorists appear to shoot civilians who are lying on the ground in a video posted by Gaza Now, a Hamas-aligned news outlet based in Gaza. Photo: Screenshot
Hamas murdered 11 Palestinians in Gaza on Thursday who the terrorist organization accused of “collaborating” with Israel, according to Hamas-aligned media sources.
Gaza Now, a Hamas-aligned news outlet based in Gaza, reported on Thursday that “six collaborators of the Zionist occupation were executed in Rafah, south of the Gaza Strip, a short while ago.”
“And punishing 17 others by shooting them in the feet as a result of exploiting the suffering of the people of Gaza and cooperating with the occupation in suffocating the people, raising prices, and stealing humanitarian aid, including merchants,” Gaza Now added.
Then, the news outlet reported that “five collaborators of the Zionist occupation were executed in the southern Gaza Strip a short while ago, bringing the number of collaborators executed today to 11.”
Video posted by Gaza Now shows what appear to be Hamas terrorists shooting civilians who are lying on the ground.
According to the outlet, these executions are likely only the start of a widespread crackdown on those in Gaza who are suspected of “collaborating with Israel.”
Adding that executions will begin to take place across the Gaza Strip, not just in Rafah, the outlet said that “a special unit of the security services in Gaza will strike with an iron fist, and there will be no repentance for anyone except the punishment of bullets.”
In response to the news, Hamza Hawidy, a Palestinian originally from Gaza City who is a peace activist, explained that this was to be “expected” from Hamas, which has ruled Gaza with brutal force since it first took over the coastal enclave in the mid-2000s.
“This isn’t a novel tactic,” Hawidy argued. “It’s an age-old strategy employed by Hamas to silence critics and instill fear among citizens who oppose their rule. I would greatly welcome a position from the pro-Palestinian movement advocating for pressure on Hamas to end its ongoing oppression of the people in Gaza.”
Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, who is a resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank and a Palestinian peace activist originally from Gaza, argued that “many ‘human rights’ organizations around the world have long seen the videos of Hamas’s terrorist thugs brutalizing the civilian population in Gaza, never saying a word of acknowledgment or condemnation because, apparently, Palestinian lives are only worthwhile when Israeli military attacks kill them.”
He added that “anyone who is still remaining silent about Hamas’s brutal anti-Palestinian terrorism in Gaza after the ceasefire, when there is conclusive, visual, and overwhelming evidence of the group’s criminality, deserves to be ridiculed and forever shunned by the human rights activism and advocacy communities.”
The post ‘Punishment of Bullets’: Hamas Executes 11 Palestinians Accused of ‘Collaborating’ With Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login