08-06-2026
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that a plaintiff must show their need for a religious accommodation motivated an employer’s adverse employment decision.
Jessica Bergin worked for the New York Unified Court System (USC). She requested an exemption from the court’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate in 2021 based on her religious objections. USC asked her to fill out a supplemental questionnaire. Bergin submitted it without answering many of the questions. After USC denied her accommodation request, she filled out a new form. USC said it would not consider the new submission and denied her request for accommodation. It placed Bergin on administrative leave and terminated her employment. Bergin sued USC for religious discrimination.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee must demonstrate that the need for an accommodation is due to their religious practices, and that the employer’s intention to avoid that accommodation is a “motivating factor” in its adverse employment action. To reach this holding, the Second Circuit relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch (holding plaintiff must show need for accommodation was motivating factor in employer’s decision). Bergin argued that Abercrombie was not applicable to her claims because that case related to a failure to hire, rather than job termination. The Second Circuit rejected Bergin’s argument, asserting that her argument was contrary to Title VII’s language that treats “hiring and firing alike.” The court noted that the key analysis was an employer’s motive for the adverse employment action, not whether an employee told their employer about the need for a religious accommodation.
Takeaway: The Second Circuit decision discarded the jurisdiction’s prior test for religious accommodation cases. Moving forward, courts in Connecticut, New York, and Vermont will analyze whether a plaintiff has provided sufficient evidence that the need for religious accommodation was an employer’s motivating reason for an adverse employment decision. This assessment will precede any assertion by an employer of undue hardship.