Quiz #98 the Heuristic that Groff v. DeJoy corrected

The Religion Law Quiz Podcast

A heuristic is a mental shortcut that we use to reach decisions. We all use heuristics and they can be very helpful. But sometimes our use of a heuristic can be an Achilles heel because our generation and use of the heuristic overlooks critical details which, when they are considered, helps us realize that the heuristic that we used and created is incorrect.

With that concept in mind, when you analyze the Supreme Court’s recent Groff v. DeJoy, 143 S. Ct. 2279 (2023) decision it becomes clear that several courts had previously employed a heuristic with respect to a prior Supreme Court case. The Groff decision identified that heuristic (although the Supreme Court didn’t call it such) and then it pointed to several key aspects in its prior decision which showed that the heuristic phrase was incorrect. For our two-part quiz today, (a) what was the heuristic phrase that was used and (b) what was the name of the prior decision from which that heuristic phrase came from?

(If you get both these answers right then you must be an L&E rockstar!)

(Scroll down for the answer)

Answer: The heuristic phrase was “more than a de minimis cost” and it came from Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63, 97 S.Ct. 2264, 53 L.Ed.2d 113 (1977). Consider what the Supreme Court said:

We hold that showing “more than a de minimis cost,” as that phrase is used in common parlance, does not suffice to establish “undue hardship” under Title VII. Hardison cannot be reduced to that one phrase. In describing an employer's “undue hardship” defense, Hardison referred repeatedly to “substantial” burdens, and that formulation better explains the decision. We therefore, like the parties, understand Hardison to mean that “undue hardship” is shown when a burden is substantial in the overall context of an employer's business. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 61–62 (argument of Solicitor General). This fact-specific inquiry comports with both Hardison and the meaning of “undue hardship” in ordinary speech.
Groff v. DeJoy, 143 S. Ct. 2279, 2294 (2023).

Disclaimer: The Religion Law Quizzes are provided as a service to you. They are intended only for educational purposes. Nothing in the Quizzes is intended to be legal advice and they should not be relied upon as conclusive on any issue discussed therein.

HERE IS AN AI GENERATED SUMMARY OF TODAY’S PODCAST

Welcome to another engaging episode of the Religion Law Podcast, exploring the realm of religious freedom and other religion law-related subjects. This episode, number 98, continues with our discussion on the 2023 Graf v. DeJoy Supreme Court decision, uncovering a different perspective with a deeper insight.

Hosted by Michael Fielding, this episode explores the concept of heuristic, a mental shortcut, and how it occasionally leads to overlooking crucial details that could reshape our understanding of a situation or event. Analyzing the Supreme Court's Groff v. DeJoy decision reveals how several courts regularly employed a heuristic approach to a prior Supreme Court case, resulting in the Supreme Court pointing out the overlooked aspects in its prior decision.

Fielding also discusses the implications and practical takeaways from the Groff v. DeJoy decision on employers and employees. The Supreme Court held that under Title VII, employers are required to accommodate the religious practices of their employees unless doing so would pose an undue hardship on the business. It emphasizes that an employer must prove a substantial burden should they wish to deny a religious accommodation under Title VII. Misinterpretation of the heuristic phrase "more than a de minimis cost," leads courts to focus on one small phrase from the Transworld Airlines vs. Hardison decision, rather than the big picture.

Through an understanding of the overarching requirement for substantial burden, the Supreme Court offered a corrected perspective. Life lesson in this episode revolves around the importance of avoiding myopic perspectives and viewing situations through a more encompassing lens. Journey with us as we dissect legal decisions, helping you become a labor and employment superstar.

Enjoy the deep dives, insights, and life lessons from the world of law and religion. Discover the valuable perspectives that could reshape your understanding, not just in law, but in life too.