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
Pulsifer v. United States - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 17:53
On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Pulsifer v. United States. The Supreme Court considered an Eighth Circuit case that raised the question: "Must a defendant show he does not meet any of the criter…
Garland v. Cargill - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 47:11
On February 28, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Garland v. Cargill. The Court considered whether bump stocks are considered "machineguns" as defined by Title 26 of the United States Code.Please join us as…
Trump v. Anderson - Post-Decision SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 17:20
On March 4, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Trump v. Anderson. At issue was whether the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering former President Donald Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ball…
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, CA - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 34:05
On January 9, 2024, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, CA. The Court considered whether a building-permit exaction is exempt from the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine as appli…
SEC v. Jarkesy - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 29:13
On November 29, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy. The Court considered three questions – (1) Whether statutory provisions that empower the Securities and Exchan…
Moore v. United States - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 27:52
On December 5, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Moore v. United States. The Court considered whether the 16th Amendment authorizes Congress to tax unrealized sums without apportionment among the states. Joi…
Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 34:18
On December 4, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. The Court considered whether as part of a plan of reorganization under a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, if the Bankruptcy Code author…
United States v. Rahimi - Post-Argument SCOTUScast [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 36:19
On November 7, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in United States v. Rahimi. The Court considered whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), prohibiting the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violen…