Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

$240,000 jury award to Muslim truck drivers who were fired for refusing to transport alcohol
WAPO ^ | Oct. 23, 2015 | Eugene Volokh

Posted on 10/23/2015 6:55:33 PM PDT by PROCON

One more data point on the “When does your religion legally excuse you from doing part of your job?” question — like it or not, under American law, employers sometimes do have to excuse employees from tasks that the employees find religiously objectionable. Tuesday, two Muslim truck drivers who were fired for refusing to deliver shipments containing alcohol were awarded $40,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages by the jury in their discrimination claim.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought suit on their behalf (EEOC v. Star Transport Co., Inc. (N.D. Ill.)), arguing that the employer had failed to provide “reasonable accommodations” to the employees — i.e., accommodations (including an exemption from job duties) that could be provided without “undue hardship” to the employer or others. The court noted that Star Transport had indeed often “swap[ped]’ loads between drivers,” and Star Transport conceded that it could have easily accommodated this request, too, but argued (unsuccessfully) that it shouldn’t be liable for punitive damages.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alcohol; creepingsharia; islamofascism; kimdavis; rop; startransport
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: PROCON

I agree .. no Christian is ever afforded such an exemption from certain portions of their jobs.


21 posted on 10/23/2015 8:11:49 PM PDT by CyberAnt ("The fields are white unto Harvest")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

So Christians are required to bake cakes and make flower arrangements or they go to jail, but Muslims can do anything they want and call “religious freedom”.

If I was in ISIS, I’d be planning to blow Americans up too. :)


22 posted on 10/23/2015 8:44:40 PM PDT by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I’ll bet Kim Davis is happy to hear that she can now expect $240K!!!


23 posted on 10/23/2015 8:51:49 PM PDT by G Larry (ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS impose SLAVE WAGES on LEGAL Immigrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Then people wonder why employers are reluctant to hire women, blacks, queers, and now mudslimes.
These people do it to themselves.


24 posted on 10/23/2015 8:59:51 PM PDT by 5th MEB (Progressives in the open; --- FIRE FOR EFFECT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I guess the key is never hire them in the first place


25 posted on 10/23/2015 9:02:39 PM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Don’t hire Muslims, problem solved.


26 posted on 10/23/2015 9:04:34 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
They hired on knowing full well they'd have to haul x,y,z. This is another set up. Probably coached by Jarrett -


27 posted on 10/23/2015 9:05:56 PM PDT by bgill ( CDC site, "we still do not know exactly how people are infected with Ebola")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON; All
"The EEOC said that Star Transport Inc., a trucking company based in Morton, Ill., violated their religious rights ..."

There are major constitutional problems indicated by the excerpt above imo. First, regardless what FDR’s activist justices wanted everybody to believe about the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), a previous generaton of state-sovereignty respecting justices had clarified the following. The states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate commerce, which reasonably includes not interfering with an employer’s decision to fire employees.

”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

Next, even if the states had delegated such powers to the feds, the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide them from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected bureacrats like those running the EPA, FCC or EEOC. So Congress has a constitutional “monopoly” on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not imo.

But by delegating federal legislative / regulatory powers to non-elected bureaucrats, powers that Congress doesn’t have in the first place in this case, corrupt Congress is wrongly protecting such powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of Sections 1-3 mentioned above.

Next …

Regarding the idea of an employer violating an employee’s constitutional rights, please consider the following. The Supreme Court had clarified in United States v. Cruikshank, that case dealing with the scope of constitutional rights, that the Constitution protects a citizen’s enumerated rights only from the state and federal governments, not from other citizens.

So the constitutionally undefined EEOC actually has no constitutional basis for its religious freedom violation accusations against the referenced employer imo. And I don’t think that religious issues were the main reason that the employer fired the employees. After all, the employer had hired them!

Finally, it appears that the EEOC was intended to police all kinds of INTRAstate discrimination issues related to Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s & 70s. The problem with this is the following.

The only civil rights issues that the states have amended the Constitution to expressly protect, for which the feds have the 14th Amendment power to legislatively address, are three of the four voting rights amendments as evidenced by the 15th, 19th and 26th Amendments. So the low-information, Democratic-controlled (I think) Congress of the 60s and 70s actually had no constitutional authority to make laws addressing intrastate discrimination issues outside the scope of constitutionally enumerated voting rights.

In fact, the corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification, low-information Senate once again failed to protect the states as the Founding States had established the Senate to do. In this case the Senate failed to kill the constitutionally indefensible bills that led to the civil rights acts.

Note that the Senate also failed to use its constitutional Article V power to lead Congress to propose civil rights amendments to the Constitution to the states. If the states had chosen to ratify such amendments, then Congress would have the constitutional authority to make such laws.

As mentioned in related threads, the ill-conceived 17th Amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt, Constitution-ignoring senators who help to pass unconstitutional bills along with it.

28 posted on 10/23/2015 9:34:36 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Well isn’t that special. Rag heads make a ton of money but Kimmy refusing to do certificates get vilified. Interesting.


29 posted on 10/24/2015 2:52:06 AM PDT by napscoordinator (Walker for President 2016. The only candidate with actual real RESULTS!!!!! The rest...talkers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

Yes, it happened quickly. All I could think to do was stare at the boxes of the nearest skids to see if I recognized anything going to/from the automotive electronics plant where I work (thankfully, no). He’d already paid, and was acting in a hurry so he was off as soon as he’d tossed it in.

We did manage to give him a free Mark Cahill book, though, as part of the deal. Hopefully it does some good. :-)


30 posted on 10/24/2015 3:03:18 AM PDT by Another Post-American (Jesus died for your sins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Where were these folks when that gal in Kentucky was raked across the coals for not signing homo marriage licenses?????


31 posted on 10/24/2015 4:05:37 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
All religious freedoms were created equal. But some religious freedoms were created more equal than others.

Now for a short public service announcement to those on FR:

GO CRUZ!! Keep it up Trump!!

Donate to Cruz

Donate to FR

32 posted on 10/24/2015 4:07:42 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Companies fault, include specifics in your hiring notice


33 posted on 10/24/2015 4:54:56 AM PDT by ronnie raygun (better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

But Christian bakers have to bake cakes with homosexual decorations.


34 posted on 10/24/2015 5:22:55 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
Next: Refusal to deliver pork, bacon or anything non-halal.

35 posted on 10/24/2015 6:16:59 AM PDT by BitWielder1 (I'd rather have Unequal Wealth than Equal Poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

The Muslim truck drivers probably went to a bar and got drunk to celebrate their ‘win’.


36 posted on 10/24/2015 12:08:09 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

But Christians must bake gay cakes.


37 posted on 10/24/2015 6:52:44 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (We must first defeat RINOs before we can even encounter a Democrat to fight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

So, does this not set a legal precedent for all subsequent cases involving religious freedoms and conscientious objections...regardless of the “religion” involved?


38 posted on 10/25/2015 8:22:59 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves Month")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Don’t ask them to bake a cake or make a pizza, though.


39 posted on 10/25/2015 11:24:33 AM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson