Podcast appearances and mentions of gerald groff

In this interview, First Liberty Senior Counsel Stephanie Taub is joined by attorney Randy Wenger of the Independence Law Center to explain what's going on with Gerald Groff after he won at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Joel, Luke, Travis, and Chris finish their discussion of Thomas Paine's Common Sense and also discuss Gerald Groff's Title VII lawsuit concerning working on the Lord's Day.

Joel, Luke, Travis, and Chris finish their discussion of Thomas Paine's Common Sense and also discuss Gerald Groff's Title VII lawsuit concerning working on the Lord's Day.

From the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM):"Gerald Groff, a former postal worker, sued the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) for failing to accommodate his religious practice. Groff is an evangelical Christian who observes a Sunday Sabbath, meaning he doesn't work on that day. USPS does not deliver mail on Sundays, but it does have a contract to deliver packages for Amazon that includes Sunday deliveries. USPS sought co-workers to voluntarily cover Groff's Sunday shifts, and it imposed progressive discipline for Groff's absences. Eventually, Groff resigned."He lost his lawsuit twice, with lower courts ruling that the Postal Service accommodating Sunday off meant too much pain for his employer and co-workers. But the Supremes had a different take. Wrote Justice Alito:  "A hardship that is attributable to employee animosity to a particular religion, to religion in general, or to the very notion of accommodating religious practice, cannot be considered undue. Bias or hostility to a religious practice or accommodation cannot supply a defense,"Got employees?  Your bar for religious accommodation may have just gotten much higher.Step into the complex world of employment law with our guest, Jennifer Wasserman, an authority in the field, as we dissect landmark decisions and their profound implications on religious accommodation at workplaces. Ever wondered how the 1964 Civil Rights Act is interpreted when it comes to religious accommodation? You're in for the deets.In this enlightening conversation, Jennifer and your loveable inimitable host Bob Sewell scrutinize the Supreme Court case of Groff v. United States Postal Service, uncovering the layers of legal expectations of employers. We also bring to light the influence of seniority systems in shift changes and the concept of 'reasonable accommodation.' 

The cases involving affirmative action and Lorie Smith and 303 Creative have received the most attention from the recent Supreme Court term, but another ruling has important implications for religious liberty. The Court ruled that U.S. Post Office employee Gerald Groff could not be forced to work on Sundays.   Thanks are due to Groff and his lawyers at The First Liberty Institute. In the past, employers could get away with merely offering lip service to religious exemptions for workers because any vaguely defined “undue hardship” for the bosses overrode their faith concerns. Now, employers must demonstrate that accommodating an employee's faith would entail a “substantial increased cost” before demanding their conformity.   The ruling is a final blow to the “now abrogated” Lemon Test that hampered religious liberty for a half-century. It also provides legal standing for challenging other impositions on religious liberty at work—such as being forced to use “preferred pronouns,” or post rainbow flags, or join “pride” marches.  

On June 29, 2023 SCOTUS issued an opinion concerning Title VII, religious liberties, and employment law. In deciding Groff v. DeJoy, the Court held “ Title VII requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business.”The case involved Gerald Groff, a Christian who due to his religious convictions treated Sundays as a sabbath and thus did not work on those days, who formerly worked for the U.S. Postal Service in Pennsylvania. His refusal to violate his beliefs to work Sunday shifts led to disciplinary action and his eventual resignation. Groff sued and the following litigation raised two questions that the Court considered. Both concerned the protections provided to employees who seek to practice their religious beliefs in the context of the workplace. One was whether the Court should 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. The other concerned whether burdens on employees are sufficient to constitute “undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business” for the employer under Title VII.In this Post-Decision Courthouse Steps webinar, where we broke down and analyzed the Court's decision. Featuring:--Stephanie Taub, Senior Counsel, First Liberty Institute--Bruce Cameron, Senior Atorney, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

The Supreme Court, in the case of a former mail carrier who declined to work Sundays, is setting a higher standard for employers in and out of government to reject religious accommodations in the workplace. The court, in a unanimous opinion issued Thursday, clarified businesses must grant religious accommodations to workers, unless doing so would result in “substantial increased costs” carrying out the business.The court's ruling in Groff v. DeJoy raises the bar from a previous requirement that employers must demonstrate more than “de minimis,” or minor costs to claim a religious accommodation is unreasonable. The Supreme Court made its ruling in the case of Gerald Groff, a former rural letter carrier in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Supreme Court, in the case of a former mail carrier who declined to work Sundays, is setting a higher standard for employers in and out of government to reject religious accommodations in the workplace. The court, in a unanimous opinion issued Thursday, clarified businesses must grant religious accommodations to workers, unless doing so would result in “substantial increased costs” carrying out the business. The court's ruling in Groff v. DeJoy raises the bar from a previous requirement that employers must demonstrate more than “de minimis,” or minor costs to claim a religious accommodation is unreasonable. The Supreme Court made its ruling in the case of Gerald Groff, a former rural letter carrier in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Comentario: Sobre la independencia de algunos estadounidenses Popi en Tubi: https://tubitv.com/movies/306941/popi SCOTUS: La Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos falló a favor de un cartero que se negaba a trabajar los domingos https://www.infobae.com/estados-unidos/2023/06/29/la-corte-suprema-de-estados-unidos-fallo-a-favor-de-un-cartero-que-se-negaba-a-trabajar-los-domingos/?outputType=amp-type "Gerald Groff denunció al Servicio Postal por haberlo sancionado cuando rechazó hacer entregas ese día del fin de semana. Según sus alegaciones, ese día lo tiene reservado para ir a la iglesia y estar con su familia" Concepto de acomodo razonable ¿Esto aplica a persona que aceptaron el trabajo sabiendo las condiciones? ¿Por qué es valida las justificación religiosa, que para mi no debe ser parte de la discusión gubernamental? Si eres gay las empresas pueden negarte sus servicios por motivos religiosos… y la Corte Suprema lo respalda https://eltiempolatino.com/2023/06/30/politica/corte-suprema-colorado-fallo-gay/ The Mysterious Case of the Fake Gay Marriage Website, the Real Straight Man, and the Supreme Court. In filings in the 303 Creative v. Elenis case is a supposed request for a gay wedding website—but the man named in the request says he never filed it. https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-gay-marriage-website-real-straight-man-supreme-court Legitimación activa Mi dilema desde mi moral anarquista Ante el estado Ante el otro The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws that regulate an establishment of religion, or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. ¿Partiendo de la primera enmienda, el estado está obligado garantizar la libertad religiosa, o su obligación es no intervenir con ella? ¿Esta SCOTUS creando una categoría diferente de ciudadano? Con más derechos laborales Con autoridad para decirle al resto como criar los hijos Con derecho a decidir que libros leer y cuando leerlos Con autoridad a no reconocer la identidad y el nombre de los demás Con autoridad a decidir sobre el cuerpo de los y las demás, así como estableces los procedimientos médico que puedes recibir

In case you missed it, this week the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the opinion in Groff v. Dejoy – also known as our Faithful Carrier case. The Court granted a victory to former postal carrier Gerald Groff after he lost his job for observing the Sunday Sabbath. In an unanimous decision, the Court strengthened legal protections for employees seeking religious accommodations. The far-reaching decision affects employment rights at every workplace with at least 15 employees in every state in the country. We'll be joined by Executive General Counsel Hiram Sasser, Independence Law Center's Randy Wenger, and Gerald Groff himself to break down exactly what the opinion says. You won't want to miss this special episode to learn more about how this case restores religious freedom to every American in the workplace. Learn More About This Victory >>

It's Friday, June 30th, A.D. 2023. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus.  (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus U.S. Supreme Court affirms religious liberty The Supreme Court broadened religious accommodations in the workplace in a unanimous ruling Thursday, reports LifeSiteNews.com. Gerald Groff, an evangelical Christian man and former U.S. Postal Service employee, quit his job and sued the USPS on grounds of religious discrimination after it began requiring him to work on Sundays. After the Supreme Court made the ruling, he said, “I hope this decision allows others to be able to maintain their convictions without living in fear of losing their jobs because of what they believe.” Exodus 20:8 says, “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.” The Court ruled that employers must “reasonably accommodate” workers' religions. Historically, the United States Postal Service had not delivered on Sundays. It was only after Amazon contracted with them to deliver their packages that Groff was told he had to work every day of the week. Supreme Court guts affirmative action admission policies In another major case, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the affirmative action admission policies of Harvard and the University of North Carolina, which gave weight to a prospective student's race, are unconstitutional, reports CNBC. The court's majority opinion said that the schools' affirmative action programs “unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points.” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the universities' policies violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution's 14th Amendment. The clause bars states from denying people equal protection under the law. And Justice Clarence Thomas, a Black conservative who wrote a concurring opinion, said that the schools' affirmative action admissions policies “fly In the face of our colorblind Constitution.” Female Lutheran pastor: God is “nonbinary” and Jesus had “two dads” A video of a female Lutheran pastor in Minnesota has gone viral for leading her congregation in a “sparkle creed” prayer in honor of sexual perversion pride month in which she described God as “nonbinary” and Christ Jesus as having “two dads,” reports The Christian Post. Anna Helgen, co-pastor of Edina Community Lutheran Church in the suburb of Minneapolis, delivered the prayer during a Sunday service live stream on June 25th. 2 Timothy 4:3 says, “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” Sue's abortion In 1981, at the age of 21, Sue Liebel had an abortion.  Other than her friend, who drove her to and from Planned Parenthood 90 minutes from her Indianapolis home, she didn't tell another soul for 30 years! In her interview with me as I guest host today on Generations Radio, she describes what was going through her mind as she walked up the steps of that Indiana abortion mill and the sound of that suction machine that haunts her to this day. I asked her how she felt afterwards. McMANUS: “What was going through your mind? Did you feel relief? Did you feel anxious? Did you feel heart broken?” LIEBEL: “Heart broken. I felt awful. They kept me out of the private room then and had me recover in a room that had probably six or eight La-Z-Boys with other girls who were recovering. They gave us a cold drink and some crackers. And they were checking us in terms of our bleeding, blood pressure, what have you. “We were all sitting there in like a circle in these, I want to say, Navy plush, you know, 1970s La-Z-Boy recliners. And nobody said a word. We didn't even look at each other. You know what I mean? Everyone was looking down. It was a … it was a shameful moment, for all of us, I believe. Certainly for me.” To hear my entire 38-minute interview with Sue Liebel about her abortion and the healing she experienced through Jesus Christ, go to Generations.org/radio. Transgender activists chant: “We're coming for your children!” Last Friday night, homosexual transgender activists marching in New York City's annual drag queen parade chanted: "We're here, we're queer, we're coming for your children,” reports The Blaze. Listen. ACTIVISTS: “We're here, we're queer, we're coming for your children! We're here, we're queer, we're coming for your children!" Hundreds of LHBTQ advocates paraded from Tompkins Square Park to the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village on Friday night during the annual New York City drag march.  The parade commemorated the Stonewall Riots of 1969, when there was a protest at the Stonewall Inn, a homosexual bar. Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk said, "When they tell you who they are, believe them." Matthew 18:6 says, “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in Me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” Only 39% of Americans extremely proud to be American And finally, Gallup Polling asked Americans this question: “How proud are you to be an American -- extremely proud, very proud, moderately proud, only a little proud, or not at all proud?” Now, when Gallup first asked this question in January 2001, 55% of U.S. adults were extremely proud to be American. Not surprisingly, pride intensified after 9/11, with extreme pride ranging from 65% to 70% between 2002 and 2004. However, since 2005, the percentage of Americans expressing extreme pride declined, but it remained at the majority level through 2017. Since 2018, extreme pride has consistently been below that, averaging 42%. Today, only 39% of American adults are “extremely proud” to be American. Close And that's The Worldview in 5 Minutes on this Friday, June 30th in the year of our Lord 2023. Subscribe by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

On today's program: Andrew Clyde, U.S. Representative for the 9th District of Georgia, comments on the U.S. Supreme Court's unanimous decision in favor of a postal worker's religious liberty rights and reacts to the president's 'Bidenomics' speech.

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

Gerald Groff was a postal worker in rural Pennsylvania. As a former Mennonite missionary his faith is important to him.   He requested, and was granted, Sunday's off to accommodate his religious beliefs about not working seven days. But eventually his supervisor said she was not going to put up with it any longer.   Mr. Groff ... The post Sabbath and the Supreme Court appeared first on Unconventional Business Network.

Last week, we argued at the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Gerald Groff – our Faithful Carrier. Kelly Shackelford, President CEO and Chief Counsel, and Jeff Mateer, Chief Legal Officer, were in the courtroom when it happened. Today, they join First Liberty Live! to give exclusive insights on what it's like inside the courtroom, along with a discussion of the arguments presented in the case. Watch the Oral Argument >> Learn more about this case >>

In Groff v. Dejoy the Court 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. Groff appealed, and SCOTUS is set to hear oral arguments in the case on April 18, 2023.In this recorded Courthouse Steps webinar we broke down and analyzed how oral argument went in the case the same day argument occurred. Featuring:--Hiram Sasser, Executive General Counsel, First Liberty Institute

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments last week in a case testing how far employers must go to accommodate the religious views of their employees. Former postal worker Gerald Groff, an Evangelical Christian, brought the case after the postal service signed a contract with Amazon to deliver packages all seven days of the week. Employment attorney, Gary Phelan, weighed in on the case and gave his professional feedback on it. ((00:00)) Comptroller Sean Scanlon will host the first “Urban Healthcare Summit,” the beginning of an ongoing series of roundtable discussions to examine and address healthcare obstacles faced by Connecticut residents. He shared what the series is covering and how people can weigh in with their issues. ((13:21)) News Around the Region: New Jersey umpire suggests a solution to cut down on rowdy parents interrupting little league games. Listeners weighed in on the conversation. ((22:31)) IMAGE CREDIT:  iStock / Getty Images Plus

This week the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Groff vs. Dejoy, involving a Post Office mail carrier named Gerald Groff, who, for religious reasons, wished not to work on Sundays. Previously the postal service had granted this accommodation, which was easy back when the Post Office didn't do mail delivery on […]

This week the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Groff vs. Dejoy, involving a Post Office mail carrier named Gerald Groff, who, for religious reasons, wished not to work on Sundays. Previously the postal service had granted this accommodation, which was easy back when the Post Office didn't do mail delivery on Sundays. But a few years ago the Post Office started contracting with Amazon and other package delvery services to do Sunday deliveries, though they still granted Groff his religious accommodation. But then the Post Office changed its mind and compelled Groff to work Sundays. Hence this case, raising again an aspect of the First Amendment's free exercise clause.You would think after all these decades of both religious liberty cases and employment law cases that such a situation would be well-settled, but you would be wrong. In fact the First Amendment's clauses related to the establishment and free exercise of religious remain highly contested and unsettled.One person who has a deep grasp of the broader issue is Vincent Phillip Munoz, who is the Tocqueville Associate Professor of political science and law at the University of Notre Dame. His most recent book is “Religious Liberty and the American Founding: Natural Rights and the Original Meanings of the First Amendment's Religion Clauses.” Phil's work has been cited in several Supreme Court opinions on the issue. Phil sat down recently with John Yoo and me to discuss the issue, and the wider issue of how constitutional originalism should be understood today. You could think of this episode as a “two-whisky happy hour,” as we wanted to have Lucretia Zoom in, but she wasn't able to, so Phil got off the hook. But in any case, let's turn to Phil now.Note: Apologies for the background static and other sound issues. We had our communal microphone on the wrong settings, and it was not amenable to a post-production fix.

It's Thursday, April 20th, A.D. 2023. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com). By Jonathan Clark 300 died in Sudan, Africa Last Saturday, fighting broke out in the African nation of Sudan between the country's official military and its paramilitary rival. The streets of Khartoum, the country's capital, are strewn with bodies. Nearly 300 people have died from the fighting.  Hopes for religious freedom came to Sudan after the overthrow of the brutal Islamic regime of Omar al-Bashir in 2019. A military coup two years later and the latest clashes have pushed back such hopes. As different military groups fight for control of Sudan, Christians face new threats. Fikiru Mehari with Open Doors said, “Christians, who are already in a difficult situation, will face the war with severity because they have no one around to support them.” Sudan is ranked 10th on the Open Doors' World Watch List of nations where it is most difficult to be a Christian. Anglican leaders consider their future About 1,300 Anglican leaders and lay people traveled to Kigali, Rwanda for the fourth Global Anglican Future Conference this week. The conference will be considering the future of the Anglican Communion. Anglican leaders from around the world are at odds with the Church of England and The Episcopal Church USA.  The two Anglican branches among others have come out in favor of sexually perverted lifestyles.  Archbishop Foley Beach  addressed the conference in Rwanda on Monday. He called on Anglicans in England and the U.S. to repent and, “Return to the teaching of the Word of God.” Christian mailman refused to work on Sundays The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday in a case involving religion in the workplace. Former mailman Gerald Groff is challenging the U.S. Postal Service for discriminating against his Christian practice of honoring the Lord's Day.  He deliberately started a career as a mailman because, at the time, there were no Sunday deliveries. However, that all changed when the Postal Service contracted with Amazon to provide deliveries on Sunday. For trying to live out his faith, Groff faced disciplinary action for years before quitting.  He hopes his case will send a message. He said, “No employee should be forced to make the same decision the Postal Service forced upon me: faith or job.” Exodus 20:8 says, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Supreme Court to rule Friday on Abortion Kill Pill Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is holding out on a decision about the Abortion Kill Pill (mifepristone).  Yesterday, Justice Samuel Alito extended a temporary block on a lower-court ruling. A U.S. District Court in Texas had invalidated the F.D.A.'s approval of the Abortion Kill Pill as well as mail-delivery of the abortifacient. The move ignited a series of court rulings, bringing the issue before the Supreme Court. A decision from the high court is not expected until Friday. For now, the Abortion Kill Pill remains legal.  Greater number of Americans are Independents New data from Gallup shows a record 49% of U.S. adults say they are political Independents, up from 33% in 1990. The rest of the population evenly identifies as Republican (25%) or Democrat (also 25%). Jeff Jones with Gallup noted, “What is unusual is that as Gen X and millennials get older, they are staying independent rather than picking a party, as older generations tended to do.” Federal Reserve expects mild recession The Federal Reserve expects the U.S. economy to enter a recession this year. The projection comes from documents released last week. The Fed expects the recent series of bank failures to cause a “mild recession starting later this year, with a recovery over the subsequent two years.” 75% of Americans say faith is important And finally, a new poll from Rasmussen found that 75% of American adults say their faith is important to their everyday lives, up from 71% in 2018. Twenty-five percent of respondents identified as Evangelical Christian, 21% as Roman Catholic, 16% as Protestant, 3% as Jewish, 1% as Muslim, 17% as some other religion, and 12% as atheist.  Evangelicals were the most likely to say their faith was important to their daily lives. The religious group was also the most likely to say that religious institutions are watering down or abandoning their traditional beliefs.  In Revelation 3:3, Jesus said, “Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you.” Close And that's The Worldview in 5 Minutes on this Thursday, April 20th in the year of our Lord 2023. Subscribe by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

The Supreme Court seemed less divided by ideological lines during the Groff v. DeJoy oral arguments, as justices searched for common ground to clarify a standard from a 1977 decision that no advocate seems to be fully supporting. Amanda and Holly share their thoughts from the day, playing key moments from the courtroom in their breakdown of the legal issues and sticking points in the case. What, exactly, constitutes “undue hardship” when looking at the practical realities of the modern workplace and the strain that one worker's need – religious or not – can cause on others?    Segment 1: Statutory stare decisis (starting at 00:47) Learn more about Groff v. DeJoy on our website: BJConline.org/Groff, which includes a link to the brief BJC joined and Holly's preview column. Listen to our preview of the case in episode 17: Is ‘de minimis' enough? Holly mentioned this story from Nina Totenberg on NPR: Who bears the burden, and how much, when religious employees refuse Sabbath work? Visit the Supreme Court's website to listen to oral arguments in Groff v. DeJoy and read a transcript.  At the Supreme Court, Aaron Streett argued on behalf of the petitioner, Gerald Groff, and Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued on behalf of the United States Postal Service.  We played one clip from the oral arguments during this segment: Justice Elena Kagan and Aaron Streett (this exchange takes place at 12:29 in the oral arguments)   Segment 2: A Court looking for common ground to clarify the law  (starting at 14:14) We played five clips from the oral arguments in this segment: Justice Neil Gorsuch and Elizabeth Prelogar (this exchange takes place at 57:58 in the oral arguments) Justice Elena Kagan and Aaron Street (from 31:26 in the arguments) Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Aaron Street (from at 34:26 in the arguments) Aaron Street responding to Justice Amy Coney Barrett (from 40:29 in the arguments) Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Elizabeth Prelogar (from 1:35:11 in the arguments)   Segment 3: How will the Court fix this problem?  (starting at 25:43) Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC. 

Religious freedom in the workplace: Supreme Court to hear the case today of mailman Gerald Groff, who was told to work on Sundays, but he tells CBN News he said no, because he was raised in a Christian family where they didn't work on the ... ...

Gerald Groff, a Christian former postal worker living in rural southeast Pennsylvania, says he was not allowed to observe Sabbath on Sundays and was punished when he did not work those days.

Religious freedom in the workplace: Supreme Court to hear the case today of mailman Gerald Groff, who was told to work on Sundays, but he tells CBN News he said no, because he was raised in a Christian family where they didn't work on the ... ...

Religious freedom in the workplace: Supreme Court to hear the case today of mailman Gerald Groff, who was told to work on Sundays, but he tells CBN News he said no, because he was raised in a Christian family where they didn't work on the ... ...

Religious freedom in the workplace: Supreme Court to hear the case today of mailman Gerald Groff, who was told to work on Sundays, but he tells CBN News he said no, because he was raised in a Christian family where they didn't work on the ... ...

Religious freedom in the workplace: Supreme Court to hear the case today of mailman Gerald Groff, who was told to work on Sundays, but he tells CBN News he said no, because he was raised in a Christian family where they didn't work on the ... ...

In the shortest news hit we've ever provided, the Fox Dominion trial is back on. There has been no confirmation as to what the 24 hour delay was for. All the news stories you're reading today that try to say more are just speculating. The end. Dominion's defamation case against Fox poised for trial after delay | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear an appeal by former mail carrier Gerald Groff, who claims that the U.S. Postal Service discriminated against him on religious grounds. Groff, an evangelical Christian, was disciplined for refusing to work on Sundays, when he observes the Sabbath. Lower courts dismissed Groff's lawsuit, arguing that exempting him from Sunday work would place too much hardship on his co-workers and employer. Groff's case centers on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on religion, among other factors. His attorneys are asking the Supreme Court to require companies to show "significant difficulty or expense" before denying a religious accommodation. The case has sparked debate over whether religious people are more deserving than others of weekend days off from work. Unions representing postal workers have urged the justices to consider the hardship that religious accommodations have on co-workers. The case is being closely watched as the Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, has a track record of expanding religious rights.US Supreme Court tackles religious bias claim against Postal Service | ReutersU.S. News & World Report has delayed the release of its annual law school rankings by a week amid claims that the employment data they used is flawed. The publication gave an early copy of the rankings to schools on April 11th, as is customary, and some of them say they have already identified discrepancies with the data. The rankings are now scheduled to be published on April 25th. This year, U.S. News & World Report said it would give full weight to law graduates in school-funded fellowships and those in graduate program, a change from how employment was previously reported. The ostensible reason those outcomes were not reported as employment on par with a firm or in-house was the degree to which a school could “hire” its own graduates to bolster its numbers. Law schools say US News rankings include faulty job data, as release delayed | ReutersJohnson & Johnson's subsidiary is seeking to pause more than 38,000 lawsuits alleging that its talc products cause cancer, as it takes another attempt at resolving the litigation in bankruptcy. At a hearing in Trenton, New Jersey, LTL Management will argue that the "automatic stay" under bankruptcy law should also protect J&J, which has a market value of over $430 billion and has not filed for bankruptcy itself. Two groups of cancer plaintiffs and the US Department of Justice's bankruptcy watchdog have opposed the company's bid for a stay, arguing that it is a fraudulent attempt to evade the earlier court ruling. Before the talc lawsuits could resume, LTL filed for bankruptcy a second time, re-opening the legal battle over the bankruptcy's legitimacy. J&J has offered $8.9 billion to settle the claims, but has not provided details about how much each claimant would receive from the deal. Some plaintiffs groups have backed the company's new bankruptcy, and J&J says that attorneys who represent 60,000 plaintiffs have agreed to support the current settlement offer. U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Michael Kaplan will now decide whether to stop the lawsuits again to give LTL a second shot at a bankruptcy settlement.J&J talc unit again seeks to halt 38,000 cancer lawsuits | ReutersApple's tax agreement with its hometown of Cupertino, California, has come under scrutiny by state regulators, who likely believe that the agreement is a form of taxpayer-fleecing collusion — and they'd be right. The issue concerns an agreement in which Apple assigns online purchases in California as if they were made within the city limits of Cupertino. This allows Cupertino to benefit from the 1% allocation of the 9.125% sales tax rate for purchases made within the city. Since 1998, Cupertino has handed 35% of that local portion, amounting to $107.7 million, to Apple, which in no doubt is partly prompting California to launch an audit. The state is examining the extent to which the California purchases attributed to Cupertino are legitimately tied to Cupertino. The permissibility of arrangements like these could give rise to bidding wars between municipalities, each vying to offer the most generous kickbacks in exchange for a corporation allocating its state sales to that location, benefiting only the corporation with the deepest pockets. Sales tax is, as it is, regressive and places a larger burden on low-income taxpayers. These agreements preserve that regressivity at the individual level and inject an additional element of regressiveness at the corporate level. Such arrangements distort the distribution of revenue among communities, taking hundreds of millions of already-collected dollars out of potential budgets for projects and putting them directly in the pockets of big corporations. Thus, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration is right to launch an audit into this particular arrangement as it is pulling already-collected and remitted sales tax, paid by consumers, out of the coffers of the state and local government and putting it directly in the hands of Apple. Big problem. Apple's Agreement With Cupertino Is Taxpayer-Fleecing Collusion Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

A Pennsylvania Christian had worked for the U.S. Postal Service until he faced multiple employment repercussions for refusing to work on Sundays due to his religious convictions. This case regarding First Amendment claims goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, with the justices hearing oral arguments this Tuesday (April 18). Gerald Groff of Lancaster County had sought work with USPS because it would be an employer where he would not be asked to work Sundays. That changed when USPS launched a new contract with a private corporation that wanted Sunday deliveries. In 2019, Groff resigned from his position as a rural mail carrier after years of -- he says -- being harassed, targeted and disciplined for refusing to work Sundays so that he could abide by the Third Commandment, to “keep holy the Sabbath day.” Groff then sued USPS for violating his religious rights. After his claims were denied by both a Pennsylvania district court and the 3rd Circuit Court, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) agreed to take up his appeal on Jan. 13. He is being represented by the First Liberty Institute.   First Liberty attorney Jeremy Dys gave Family Life's Abigail Hofland a preview of the arguments to be made in the nation's capitol. Groff's first-person story is here.  Other coverage of the issues in this case: FNN.  ABC.  CNA.

Uh oh. Do we do it? Dare we? It is perhaps the nicest day of Gilligan's Island aka the Hotel California aka United States v. Joseph Biggs, et al., Day 69. Five (5) members of the Proud Boys are being prosecuted with charges of seditious conspiracy in connection with the events of January 6, 2021. How nice will the day be? Could we finally be seeing light at the end of the tunnel? Today, Norm and Mike take up a couple of legitimacy-themed, nonalcoholic topics: › SCOTUS is set to render an opinion in Groff v. DeJoy—the case that implicates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires that employers make accommodations for the religious beliefs of employees provided that such accommodations are not an undue burden for the employer. In 2015, the United States Postal Service entered into a contract with Amazon which broke the long-tenured history of USPS employees not having to work on Sundays. Gerald Groff, the petitioner, was terminated from his career with the USPS for refusing to work Sundays, the day which holds sincere religious significance for Groff and which was worth the risk of being terminated from employment. How will the Court define or redefine precedent which illustrates the notion of "undue burden" with a standard of anything more than a de minimis accommodation? › Remember when we covered the case of Ethan Crumbley, the Michigan high schooler whose parents were charged with negligent manslaughter after Ethan brought a firearm to school and killed four of his peers? Well, a first-grader in Newport News, Virginia, has reportedly brought a firearm to his elementary school and shot his teacher. The first-grader's mother, Deja Nicole Taylor, has been indicted by a grand jury on charges of child neglect and child endangerment. How do the cases compare? Join us. For the rest of the year, creators will receive 100 percent of the revenue from the purchase of monthly subscription badges, which Rumble recently launched for the price of $5 per month. Please consider purchasing a subscription badge to LAL and be assured that LAL will receive every penny of that subscription through the end of the year. Your consideration and patronage is most sincerely appreciated! Daily livestreams beginning at 7:45am EST on: . › Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/LawandLegitimacy › Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@lawandlegitimacy › Twitter: https://twitter.com/PattisPodcast Subscribe and turn on notifications! Support Law and Legitimacy: - Locals: https://lawandlegitimacy.locals.com/ - Twitter: @PattisPodcast, @PattisNorm, and @MichaelBoyer_ - Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Audible, Spotify, or wherever you receive podcasts and rate LAL 5 stars. - Subscribe here on our Rumble and Youtube channels, give us a Rumble, and join our active community of free-thinkers, contrarians, and the unafraid on Locals!

Uh oh. Do we do it? Dare we? It is perhaps the nicest day of Gilligan's Island aka the Hotel California aka United States v. Joseph Biggs, et al., Day 69. Five (5) members of the Proud Boys are being prosecuted with charges of seditious conspiracy in connection with the events of January 6, 2021. How nice will the day be? Could we finally be seeing light at the end of the tunnel? Today, Norm and Mike take up a couple of legitimacy-themed, nonalcoholic topics: › SCOTUS is set to render an opinion in Groff v. DeJoy—the case that implicates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires that employers make accommodations for the religious beliefs of employees provided that such accommodations are not an undue burden for the employer. In 2015, the United States Postal Service entered into a contract with Amazon which broke the long-tenured history of USPS employees not having to work on Sundays. Gerald Groff, the petitioner, was terminated from his career with the USPS for refusing to work Sundays, the day which holds sincere religious significance for Groff and which was worth the risk of being terminated from employment. How will the Court define or redefine precedent which illustrates the notion of "undue burden" with a standard of anything more than a de minimis accommodation? › Remember when we covered the case of Ethan Crumbley, the Michigan high schooler whose parents were charged with negligent manslaughter after Ethan brought a firearm to school and killed four of his peers? Well, a first-grader in Newport News, Virginia, has reportedly brought a firearm to his elementary school and shot his teacher. The first-grader's mother, Deja Nicole Taylor, has been indicted by a grand jury on charges of child neglect and child endangerment. How do the cases compare? Join us. For the rest of the year, creators will receive 100 percent of the revenue from the purchase of monthly subscription badges, which Rumble recently launched for the price of $5 per month. Please consider purchasing a subscription badge to LAL and be assured that LAL will receive every penny of that subscription through the end of the year. Your consideration and patronage is most sincerely appreciated! Daily livestreams beginning at 7:45am EST on: . › Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/LawandLegitimacy › Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@lawandlegitimacy › Twitter: https://twitter.com/PattisPodcast Subscribe and turn on notifications! Support Law and Legitimacy: - Locals: https://lawandlegitimacy.locals.com/ - Twitter: @PattisPodcast, @PattisNorm, and @MichaelBoyer_ - Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Audible, Spotify, or wherever you receive podcasts and rate LAL 5 stars. - Subscribe here on our Rumble and Youtube channels, give us a Rumble, and join our active community of free-thinkers, contrarians, and the unafraid on Locals!

Gerald Groff worked for seven years for the U.S. Postal Service, but it became a struggle to get his employer to accommodate his observance of Sundays for worship. He and his attorney, Randall Wenger, chat about his upcoming case before the high court, which will hear arguments on the matter April 18.

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to prepare for the U.S. Supreme Court? Meet our co-counsel, Randy Wenger and Alan Reinach. Together we'll take our Faithful Carrier case to the Supreme Court in April. They'll discuss what goes into prepping for the highest court in the land. With decades of experience litigating at the highest levels, Randy and Alan are uniquely qualified to walk you through their preparations for next month's oral argument.   Learn more about Gerald Groff >>

Join Stephanie Taub, Bruce Cameron, Blaine Hutchinson for discussion on Groff v. Dejoy, which was recently added to the Supreme Court docket. This case highlights questions at the intersection of religious liberty and workplace accommodation. Gerald Groff alleges workplace discrimination by the U.S. Postal Service based on his faith under Title VII of the Civil […]

Join Stephanie Taub, Bruce Cameron, Blaine Hutchinson for discussion on Groff v. Dejoy, which was recently added to the Supreme Court docket. This case highlights questions at the intersection of religious liberty and workplace accommodation. Gerald Groff alleges workplace discrimination by the U.S. Postal Service based on his faith under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. His refusal to work Sunday shifts due to Sabbath observance resulted in a penalty and sparked a contentious legal debate. Register now to stay up-to-date on this important case that has the potential to shape the future of religious liberty in the workplace. Featuring: Stephanie Taub, Senior Counsel, First Liberty Institute Bruce Cameron, Staff Attorney, National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund Blaine Hutchison, Staff Attorney, National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund --- To register, click the link above.

Jeremy Dys from the First Liberty Institute provides an overview of some of their top court cases for 2023. The cases include one before the US Supreme Court about a former US Postal Service worker who was denied a religious accomodation with his schedule. Gerald Groff requested that he not work on Sundays in observance of his religious beliefs. Dys also discusses other cases before appealate courts, including the case of military personel who object to the Department of Defense's CoVID vaccine requirement. https://firstliberty.org/news/a-spring-full-of-major-court-battles/

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will hear our case involving Gerald Groff, a postal worker who was wrongly forced to quit his job because of his religious beliefs. Senior Counsel Stephanie Taub joins this week's First Liberty Live! to discuss this case and the implications that a victory at the Supreme Court could have on millions of people of faith in the workplace. You won't want to miss this exciting episode and hear how First Liberty is going back to the Supreme Court. Learn more about this case >>

It's Monday, January 16th, A.D. 2023. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus. By Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com) Burmese military bomb a church leading to civilian casualties The campaign of violence continues in Myanmar against civilians. On December 30, the Burmese military shelled St. Michael Catholic Church in San Hka village, located in the predominately Christian Kachin state, reports International Christian Concern. At least one civilian was killed and five were reported injured.   Two children were among the five who were wounded after one artillery shell hit the village and another was dropped in the church compound.   This attack came two months after the military junta bombed a concert that killed 63 people. British cardiologist stuns BBC interviewer: COVID shots endanger heart In what is being hailed as a breakthrough for COVID-19 vaccine skepticism into the mainstream media, the BBC invited Dr. Aseem Malhotra, one of the most influential cardiologists in Britain, to speak on a segment about medical issues, during which he told viewers there was “lots of data” linking the COVID shots to heart problems, reports LifeSiteNews.com. Hosted by Lukwesa Burak, the segment began with the subject of statin pills for heart health. Malhotra took the opportunity to tell the BBC's audience that the mRNA-based COVID vaccines “do carry a cardiovascular risk.” MALHOTRA: “Since the [COVID] pandemic, there's been 30,000 [British] excess deaths, specifically due to cardiac atrophy. That's my area of expertise. And they're trying to figure out what's causing it. “What I, in my own research has found, and this is something that is probably a likely contributing factor, is that the COVID mRNA vaccines do carry a cardiovascular risk. “I've actually called for the suspension of this, pending an inquiry, because there's a lot of uncertainty at the moment about what's causing the excess deaths. My own father suffered a cardiac arrest at home, and the ambulance took 30 minutes. And when his post-mortem came out, he had very severe cardiac atrophy which is unexplainable.  And then I published, in a peer-reviewed journal, and they accepted my findings, that the likely cause of his death was two doses of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine he had six months earlier.” Another study found that athlete deaths are 1,700% higher than expected since COVID-19 vaccination began. Biden's classified documents fiasco President Joe Biden said he was “surprised” when classified documents were found in a closet in his former Washington think tank office and portrayed it as an honest mistake. But when another batch of classified documents was found in his garage, where he keeps his 1967 Corvette Stingray at his home in Wilmington, Delaware, pressure has mounted to explain what is fast becoming a crisis of credibility for the White House, reports The Epoch Times. Listen to the exchange between Fox News reporter Peter Doocy and President Biden. DOOCY: “Classified material -- next to your Corvette? What were you thinking?” BIDEN: “My Corvette's in a locked garage, okay? So, it's not like it's sitting out in the street!” Attorney General Merrick Garland has appointed a special counsel to investigate the case while Republicans have alleged a two-tier justice system where former President Donald Trump—who faces his own classified document probe—is seen as being treated more harshly while Biden supposedly with kid gloves. Last August, the FBI executed a search warrant at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home and seized thousands of documents, including some marked classified and top secret. The White House is facing growing criticism for not disclosing the find of the Biden-linked documents until two months after their discovery on November 2, 2022—a week before the midterm election. Supreme Court to hear Christian postman who asked for Sundays off Last Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court said it will hear the civil rights lawsuit of an Evangelical Christian postal worker who resigned from the U.S. Postal Service after it refused to allow him to observe Sunday as the Sabbath, reports The Christian Post. Gerald Groff of Pennsylvania quit the United States Postal Service in 2019 after a service of about seven years because the Quarryville Post Office in Lancaster County required him to deliver Amazon packages on Sundays. Kelly Shackelford with First Liberty, who is representing Groff, said, “It is unlawful for employers to discriminate against employees on the basis of religion. It's time for the Supreme Court to reconsider a decades-old case that favors corporations and the government over the religious rights of employees.” Exodus 20:8 says, “Remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy.” Video raises $108,000 for elderly Walmart employee to retire And finally, Rory McCarty was shocked to find an 82-year-old Navy veteran and widower still “grinding” out 8-9 hour shifts at a Walmart in Cumberland, Maryland. He realized at that moment he could put his social media influence towards a good cause. McCarty runs an extermination business called Bug Boys, and in a true 21st century story, has amassed a TikTok following of 300,000 people by showing videos of creepy crawlies he finds during work. On the GoFundMe page McCarty set up on December 19th to fund Warren “Butch” Marion's belated retirement, he wrote, “As a business owner … I was astounded seeing this little older man still grinding. Working eight to nine hour shifts.” In an initial TikTok video, McCarty told Marion about a woman who raised money on her channel to help elderly Walmart employees retire. MCCARTY: “She raised $100,000 for this woman. Now imagine if someone raised that kind of money for you?” MARION: “Woo!” McCarty raised $108,000 in just a few days to help Marion finally retire, reports GoodNewsNetwork.org. MARION: “This is for real?” MCCARTY: “Yes, oh you better believe this is for real. It'll help you a lot wouldn't it?” MARION: (Beginning to cry) “I can't thank you guys enough.” MCCARTY: “Man, come here. Give me a hug buddy.” Amazingly, Warren Marion walked into Walmart in Cumberland, Maryland, for the final time last week after having handed in a two-week notice. He was greeted with cheers, balloons, and a large check for $108,000. A video McCarty posted of them both in December has been viewed over three million times. McCarty said, “I wanted to help this Navy Veteran to live the remainder of his years traveling to see his kids in Florida, get him off his feet for 8 hours at a time, and do the things he would love to do that he may not be able to for financial reasons.” Jesus said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” (Acts 20:35) Close And that's The Worldview in 5 Minutes on this Monday, January 16th, in the year of our Lord 2023. Subscribe by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

Gerald Groff was forced to quit his job as a postal carrier because of his religious beliefs. Hear his story directly from him and learn how First Liberty is taking his case to the Supreme Court.