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
Shurtleff v. City of Boston - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 16:46
On January 18, 2022 the Court heard oral argument in Shurtleff v. City of Boston, a case which concerned the flag-flying at Boston city hall. Joining today to discuss this case is Professor Scott Gaylord of Elon Universi…
Houston Community College Sys. v. Wilson - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 20:23
On November 2nd, 2021 the Court heard argument in Houston Community College Sys. v. Wilson, a case which concerned whether the First Amendment restricts the authority of an elected body to issue a censure resolution in r…
Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 19:53
On Jan. 18, 2022 the Court heard argument in Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation. Joining today to discuss this decision in two parts is Professor Suzanna Sherry, the Herman O. Loewenstein Chair in Law E…
FEC v. Ted Cruz - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 16:51
On January 19th, the Court heard arguments in Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate. At issue were: (1) Whether appellees have standing to challenge the statutory loan-repayment limit of 52 U.S.C. 30116(j);…
Biden v. Missouri & NFIB v. DOL, OSHA - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 45:59
The Supreme Court recently issued its decisions in two federal vaccine mandate cases, Biden v Missouri and National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration…
Whole Woman's Health & U.S. v. Texas - Post-Decision SCOTUSCast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 28:08
On December 10, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson and dismissed the federal government's suit against Texas in United States v. Texas. The Court held 8-1 in Jackson that plaintiff abort…
Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 44:19
On November 8th, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga, a case which concerned whether Section 1806(f) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 displaces the…
Carson v. Makin - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 20:51
On December 8th, the Court heard arguments in Carson v. Makin, a case which concerned whether a state violates the religion clauses or equal protection clause by prohibiting students participating in an otherwise general…

«1...678910