The Supreme Court’s 9-0 ruling rejects the “de minimis” threshold established in Hardison, signaling that employers must now show a “significant difficulty or expense” before denying religious accommodations. Legal experts suggest the decision may unite both conservatives and progressives in strengthening workplace religious protections.
Groff, a rural carrier associate in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, had been required to fill in for absent colleagues, including weekend shifts. When the Postal Service began Sunday deliveries for Amazon in 2013, Groff’s objections highlighted the tension between corporate contracts and personal religious observance.
The ruling also addresses concerns from postal worker unions, which warned that accommodations for some employees could affect co-workers’ schedules. The court, however, emphasized the importance of aligning the application of Title VII with broader federal standards, similar to those used in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Minority religious organizations, including Muslim, Jewish, and Hindu advocacy groups, hailed the decision as a step toward fairer treatment in the workplace. The ruling ensures employees are no longer forced to choose between faith and employment, creating a legal framework for meaningful religious accommodations moving forward.
