Groff v. DeJoy - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

Groff v. DeJoy - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

Author: The Federalist Society June 2, 2023 Duration: 27:01
On April 18, the Court heard oral argument in Groff v. Dejoy and is set to address two issues concerning the protections provided employees who seek to practice their religious beliefs in the context of the workplace. The Court is considering whether to overrule the “more-than-de-minimis-cost” test for refusing religious accommodations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 established in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison. Also at issue is whether burdens on employees are sufficient to constitute “undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business” for the employer under Title VII.

Gerald Groff, a Christian who due to his religious convictions treated Sundays as a sabbath and thus did not work on those days, worked for the U.S. Postal Service in Pennsylvania. Although his sabbath-taking was not a problem at the beginning of his tenure with the USPS, following a 2013 agreement with Amazon, USPS began to provide service on Sundays and holidays. This meant that postal workers now had to work Sundays. Initially, Groff was able to avoid working Sundays by trading shifts with co-workers, but that eventually became untenable as co-workers were not willing or available to trade, resulting in Groff being scheduled for Sunday shifts he could not work due to his convictions. Following disciplinary action for missed shifts, and facing termination, Groff chose to resign. He sued USPS for refusing to accommodate his religious beliefs and practices as required by Title VII. The Third Circuit, following Hardison, ruled in favor of USPS, citing as sufficient to constitute the “undue hardship” test the burden placed on Groff’s coworkers who had to take more Sunday shifts and lessened workplace morale.

Join us to hear a breakdown of the oral argument!

Featuring:
Hiram Sasser, Executive General Counsel, First Liberty Institute

Tuning into the Supreme Court's docket can feel like deciphering a complex code, but SCOTUScast breaks down the arguments and decisions as they happen. Produced by The Federalist Society, this podcast delivers timely, expert analysis from legal scholars and practitioners immediately after oral arguments or when opinions are released. Each episode focuses on a specific case, cutting through the legal jargon to explain the core principles at stake, the questions posed by the justices, and the potential ramifications of the Court's rulings. You'll hear clear, substantive commentary that prioritizes understanding over advocacy, as the Society itself does not take positions on the issues discussed. The goal is to provide listeners with the intellectual tools to engage with these pivotal moments in law. Whether a landmark ruling on constitutional rights or a nuanced interpretation of statutory law, this audio series treats each development with the depth it deserves. For anyone following the judicial branch-from students and attorneys to engaged citizens-this podcast serves as an essential, real-time guide to the nation's highest court, fostering a more informed and thoughtful public discourse.
Author: Language: English Episodes: 100

SCOTUScast
Podcast Episodes
Glossip v. Oklahoma - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 19:28
On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 5-3 opinion in Glossip v. Oklahoma. The Court held that the prosecution violated its constitutional obligation to correct false testimony under Napue v. Illinois.…
Williams v. Reed - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 34:33
On February 21, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Williams v. Reed. The Court held that state courts may not deny those claims on failure-to-exhaust grounds when a state court’s application of a st…
TikTok, Inc. v. Garland - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 24:31
On January 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in TikTok, Inc. v. Garland. The Court held that the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act's provisions challenged by…
Lackey v. Stinnie - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 23:35
On February 25, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 7-2 opinion in Lackey v. Stinnie. The Court held that a party that receives a preliminary injunction but does not obtain a final judgment on the merits before a c…
SEC v. Jarkesy - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 16:50
On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 6-3 opinion in SEC v. Jarkesy. The Court held that when the Securities and Exchange Commission seeks civil penalties against a defendant for securities fraud, the Sev…
Murthy v. Missouri - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 31:04
On June 26, 2024, the Supreme Court issued their opinion in Murthy v. Missouri. Originally filed as Missouri v. Biden, this case concerns whether federal government officials violated five individuals’ freedom of speech…
FDA v. AHM - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 23:36
On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine holding that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to challenge the Food and Drug Administra…
Loper Bright & Relentless - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 23:02
On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its 6-2 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and its 6-3 decision in Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce. These decisions overturning Chevron v. NRDC (1984) ma…