It’s figured in our columns before, and now it’s in the news again: “The American Civil Liberties Union has sued a school board in North Carolina over its suspension of a teenage student for having a peridot stud in a nose-piercing.” [ABA Journal]
Posts Tagged ‘religious discrimination’
“Rastafarian sues over grooming policy”
Christopher Woodson says it would violate his religion to comply with a Waynesboro, Va. moving company’s haircut policy, so he’s appealed to the EEOC, which has filed a suit on his behalf. [Amanda Hess, TBD] More: Jon Hyman.
“Posner – ‘Nebulous suspicions voiced by a busybody’ not protected under Title VII”
Who could resist a headline like that? And the case is worth knowing about, filed by a hospital employee who seems to have jumped to the conclusion that “because her boss was a Southern Baptist and a ‘good ole boy,’ … he therefore had ‘inherent sexist attitudes.'” [Jay Lechner, Greenberg Traurig Labor and Employment Blog via Ohio Employer’s]
Muslim woman demands female attendant for emergency-room EKG
Rona Mohammedi is now suing Somerset Medical Center in New Jersey because it told her only male ER technicians would be available to check whether her severe chest pains were the result of a heart attack. [Newark Star-Ledger, White Coat]
Safety officer’s suit over “demonic” ID card yields $1
A Brooklyn school safety officer sued New York City, saying it discriminated against her religious beliefs for her to have to wear a city ID card that she considered possessed and the “sign of the Beast.” A judge ruled in her favor at an earlier stage in the proceedings, but a second judge has now awarded her just $1 damages. [NY Post]
Two bad tastes, awful together
U.K. libel tourism and blasphemy law, that is: “Up to 95,000 descendants of the prophet Muhammad are planning to bring a libel action in Britain over ‘blasphemous’ cartoons of the founder of Islam, even though they were published in the Danish press.” [Times Online via Andrew Stuttaford, Secular Right]
“If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they’ll miss lots of special offers.”
Lowering the Bar has an update on the case of the British man who said that as a member of the International Church of Jediism, he suffered religious discrimination when asked at a Tesco supermarket to remove his Obi-Wan-like head garment.
“Parents Who Won’t Vaccinate Kid Sue Catholic Preschool”
“A Rockland County family filed suit against the New York Archdiocese after a Catholic preschool wouldn’t accept their child because she has not been fully vaccinated, according to the Post. The couple — who filed the suit anonymously — claim they are the victims of religious discrimination and are seeking a court order so their 4-year-old can attend the St. Margaret School in Pearl River after the preschool rejected their request for a religious exemption.” [Gothamist]
Compelled expression and the New Mexico photographer case
A New Mexico court has upheld state-levied fines against a photographer who refused a job taking pictures at a same-sex wedding (Elane Photography v. Willock). Eugene Volokh, who has written about the case previously, now has a series of posts on the implications of the court’s effort to force creators to “create speech that they don’t want to create.” He also adds posts on the religious accommodation angle, the inevitable what-about-racists objection, and the role of state laws prohibiting “discrimination” against customers based on their political beliefs. More: Timothy Kincaid, Box Turtle Bulletin (“time for New Mexico to change its law. …ultimately what kind of freedom will we have won to live our lives as we see best if it costs the freedom of others to do the same?”).
U.K.: “Police worker fired for backing psychic investigations claims religious discrimination”
Having succeeded in winning a ruling that his beliefs in spiritualism and mediums qualify as a form of religious belief, Alan Power can proceed with his suit alleging that he was improperly dismissed because of them. His case “follows a landmark ruling last month that environmental views should be considered equivalent to religious and philosophical beliefs”. [Telegraph, Independent] (& welcome Popehat readers)