118 F.4th 839
6th Cir.2024Background
- Laurie DeVore worked for the University of Kentucky from 1999 until her retirement in 2022, ultimately serving as a department manager.
- In 2021, the University required either COVID-19 vaccination or weekly testing for on-campus employees; DeVore refused both based on asserted religious beliefs.
- DeVore repeatedly requested exemptions and accommodations, claiming the policy conflicted with her religious obligations, but the University denied each request, offering alternative testing methods (oral swab, saliva) which she also declined.
- After further refusals to comply and disciplinary proceedings, DeVore took the option of retirement rather than be terminated.
- DeVore sued the University under Title VII, arguing it failed to accommodate her religious beliefs; the district court granted summary judgment to the University, and DeVore appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DeVore’s refusal to comply with the COVID-19 testing/vaccination policy is a conflict with a sincerely held religious belief under Title VII | DeVore asserted that the policy conflicted with her religious beliefs, arguing mandatory vaccination and weekly testing were against her faith and were coercive | The University argued DeVore’s objections were not religious in nature, but rather personal, medical, or philosophical; also, alternative testing options were offered | The court held DeVore failed to show a genuine religious conflict with all available testing options; her objections were personal, not religious |
Key Cases Cited
- Thomas v. Rev. Bd. of Indiana Emp. Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707 (1981) (explains courts’ limited role in evaluating the reasonableness or logic of asserted religious beliefs)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (sets summary judgment standard for genuine issue of material fact)
- Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970) (draws distinction between religious beliefs and purely personal moral codes)
- Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) (analyzing religious objections versus personal philosophy or secular values)
- Holt v. Hobbs, 574 U.S. 352 (2015) (court must ensure religious conflict is sincerely based on religious belief, not “some other motivation”)
- E.E.O.C. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., 575 U.S. 768 (2015) (requirements for religious accommodation under Title VII)