Religious Accommodation in the American Workplace: The Consequences of the Supreme Court Decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch

Abstract

This Article examines how the Abercrombie decision represents a shift in the Supreme Court’s analysis in §701(j) cases, and how as a result of this decision lower courts will likely provide more protection to employees requesting accommodation in these cases. Abercrombie is known primarily for its holding that an employer can be liable for religious discrimination even in cases where the employer does not have “actual knowledge” of an applicant or employee’s need for religious accommodation. However, the Court also held that religious accommodation claims can be raised as disparate treatment claims, explaining that because § 701(j) defines religion to include practice as well as belief, failure to accommodate claims can constitute “intentional discrimination.” In reaching this conclusion, the Supreme Court for the first time emphasized that § 701(j) mandates more than formal equality. This is an important shift since prior to Abercrombie, the federal courts often relied on formal equality in limiting an employer’s accommodation obligation. As a result, employees may now have greater protection of their right to religious accommodation in the workplace.