A Religious Accommodation Isn't Reasonable if it Requires the Employer to Violate the Law

Title VII requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for employees' religious beliefs and practices. Earlier this week, the Supreme Court heard arguments about whether to raise the bar for what counts as "reasonable." As we noted in a previous post, the Court indicated reluctance to depart from the current standard: A religious accommodation isn't reasonable if it would impose more than a "de minimis" burden on the employer. 

Whether or not the Supreme Court disturbs current precedent (which we likely won't know until June), one thing seems fairly clear: an employer need not violate other laws to provide a religious accommodation.

A recent Colorado case involving a nursing home employee's request for an accommodation from her employer's COVID-19 vaccination policy provides one example. A magistrate judge recommended rejecting the employee's failure-to-accommodate claim on the grounds that granting her accommodation request would have required the nursing home to violate regulations from the Colorado Department of Health, which, at the time, required all healthcare workers to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. The magistrate judge found "as a matter of law that this causes an undue hardship for Defendant to accommodate Plaintiff’s religious-based vaccine exemption request."

The magistrate judge did not mention the fact that the Department of Health regulations at issue contemplated the possibility of religious exemptions, nor did she say what happens if the state law the employer is trying to follow might itself be unconstitutional or preempted. We'll see if the district court judge has anything to say about these issues as the case progresses.