Federal Judge Says Funeral Home Can Part Ways with Employee Based on Deeply-Held Religious Beliefs

Funeral
A federal judge ruled that a Detroit funeral home's decision to part ways with a transgender employee because of their deeply-held religious beliefs was not discrimination. |

A federal judge dismissed a discrimination claim by a transgender employee formerly working at a funeral home in Detroit, Michigan.

District Judge Sean Cox said that the funeral home was exempt from a law which forbids discrimination in hiring and firing based on sex, because of the company's sincerely-held religious beliefs.

The employee Anthony Stevens, whose name is now Aimee Australia Stephens, worked at the funeral home between 2007 and 2013. The employee notified the owner of R.G. &. G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Thomas Rost, that he would be going on a vacation for sex reassignment surgery, after which he would come back dressed in women's suit.

About two weeks later, Rost told him that it would be difficult for them to carry on together.

"It was right before he was going to go on vacation and I just - I said - I just said 'Anthony, this is not going to work out,'" Rost testified according to The Washington Post.

The employee complained with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which sued the funeral homes.

However, the judge said that according to 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, religious accommodation must be denied only where compelling government interests are advanced in the least restrictive way.

"Rost is a devout Christian who believes that God has called him to minister to these grieving families, and his faith informs the way he operates his business and how he presents his business to the public," his lawyers said in court documents.

Cox wrote in his opinion: "If the EEOC truly has a compelling governmental interest in ensuring that Stephens is not subject to gender stereotypes in the workplace in terms of required clothing at the Funeral Home, couldn't the EEOC propose a gender-neutral dress code (dark-colored suit, consisting of a matching business jacket and pants, but without a neck tie) as a reasonable accommodation that would be a less restrictive means of furthering that goal under the facts presented here?"

Furthermore, the judge said that EEOC appeared to promote contradictory values of eliminating gender-specific dressing codes and wanting the employee to wear skirts at the funeral home.

"The court finds that the funeral home has met its initial burden of showing that enforcement of Title VII [law on discrimination], and the body of sex-stereotyping case law that has developed under it, would impose a substantial burden on its ability to conduct business in accordance with its sincerely held religious beliefs," Cox wrote.