The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has made a landmark ruling in favor of a Christian-owned business, Braidwood Management Inc., that sought protection under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993 to choose their employees based on religious convictions.
The ruling sided with Braidwood’s claim that hiring employees whose behavior contradicts the company’s deeply held Christian beliefs constitutes a burden on their freedom of religion.
The Texas-based company’s case against the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) stemmed from Braidwood’s interpretation of Christian doctrine, including the belief that “marriage is between one man and one woman,” according to a report from the Liberty Counsel.
The company objected to employing individuals engaging in “sexually immoral or gender non-conforming” behavior.
In contrast, the EEOC argued that such bias against LGBT workers amounts to unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a stance reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Bostock v. Clayton County ruling.
However, Braidwood sought to utilize a potential exemption mentioned by Justice Neil Gorsuch in the Bostock’s majority opinion, stating that employers could potentially raise religious objections to employing LGBT individuals in their specific cases.
As such, Braidwood requested the court to apply the RFRA to shield it from EEOC enforcement that would compel it to violate its religious beliefs.
The Appeals Court, unanimously granting this exemption, declared the RFRA “requires that Braidwood, on an individual level, be exempted from Title VII because compliance with Title VII post-Bostock would substantially burden its ability to operate per its religious beliefs about homosexual and transgender conduct.”
The judges highlighted Braidwood’s conviction that it adheres to “sincere and deeply held religious beliefs that heterosexual marriage is the only form of marriage sanctioned by God, pre-marital sex is wrong, and ‘men and women are to dress and behave in accordance with distinct and God-ordained, biological sexual identity.”
They acknowledged that the EEOC guidance likely burdens the company’s religious practice.
They also noted that Title VII had put Braidwood in a challenging position of choosing between violating the law to uphold its convictions or obeying the law and betraying its beliefs.
“Being forced to employ someone to represent the company who behaves in a manner directly violative of the company’s convictions is a substantial burden and inhibits the practice of Braidwood’s beliefs…That is precisely what RFRA is designed to prevent,” the Court observed.
Although Braidwood sought class-action status for the case to include other religious businesses, the judges dismissed this request.
They explained that they could not ascertain whether the codes of conduct of other employers were sufficiently similar to Braidwood’s to justify a common resolution.
Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver commented on the ruling, saying, “The unanimous decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is a tremendous victory for religious freedom. America was founded on religious principles, and they are not just set aside during business hours.”
“Businesses must remain a free space for employers to operate in a manner consistent with their faith and convictions. This ruling confirms the broad protection the law gives religious businesses to employ people with aligned beliefs and conduct,” he added.
