EEOC Finds Interior Dept. Violated Title VII by Denying Religious Vaccine Exemptions

WASHINGTON (LN) — The EEOC’s Office of the Federal Sector issued a decision on Monday finding that the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Education violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by summarily denying religious accommodations to three employees who opposed the vaccine on religious grounds.

The decision resolved appeals from three employees at the Sherman Indian High School in Riverside, California, who cited sincerely held religious beliefs of human life, informed by their Christian faith, as the basis for their opposition to the vaccine. The employees argued that the vaccines were developed using human fetal cells obtained through abortion.

The agency had denied the requests, claiming that allowing the employees to undergo regular testing and wear masks in lieu of vaccination would be unsafe and expensive.

The EEOC’s appellate decision found the agency’s safety and cost arguments deficient. The Commission noted the agency failed to present evidence that masking and testing would create an unsafe environment. Additionally, the agency conceded that the cost of purchasing vaccine testing supplies was covered by congressional funding through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act).

Citing the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in Groff v. DeJoy, the EEOC concluded that the requested accommodations would not have imposed a substantial burden on the agency’s operations.

The decision also criticized the agency’s handling of the exemption requests, noting that employees were summoned to an inquisitorial panel to be quizzed on their medical history and knowledge of other medicines derived from human fetal cells. The decision concluded that this questioning was a "thinly veiled and discriminatory attempt to expose supposed hypocrisy and convince Complainants to recant their objections."

EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas said the decision was a step toward justice for federal employees who suffered under pandemic-era policies.

"No one is above the law, especially the federal government entrusted to enforce it," Lucas said. "The government clearly fell short of its obligation under the law."

As a result of the decision, the complainants will be compensated for the harm caused by the agency’s discriminatory actions. The agency will also be required to develop and maintain a fair and non-adversarial process for employees to pursue religious accommodations.