Using Religion to Discriminate
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI’s secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs — Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim — insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking “state secrets.” The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the ACLU of Southern California, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View Case
Learn About Using Religion to Discriminate
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2020
Using Religion to Discriminate
Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania and New Jersey/Trump v. Pennsylvania and New Jersey
Whether the government had statutory authority under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to expand the conscience exemption to the contraceptive-coverage mandate.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2018
Using Religion to Discriminate
Religious Liberty
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission
Whether a business open to the public has a constitutional right to discriminate.
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
All Cases
13 Using Religion to Discriminate Cases
California
Apr 2024
Using Religion to Discriminate
LGBTQ Rights
California Civil Rights Department v. Cathy's Creations d/b/a Tastries
On April 11, 2024, the ACLU, ACLU of Southern California, ACLU of Northern California, and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties filed an amicus brief with the California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District supporting the California Civil Rights Department’s appeal of a lower court judgment finding that a bakery owner did not violate the California public accommodations law when she refused to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple.
Explore case
California
Apr 2024
Using Religion to Discriminate
LGBTQ Rights
California Civil Rights Department v. Cathy's Creations d/b/a Tastries
On April 11, 2024, the ACLU, ACLU of Southern California, ACLU of Northern California, and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties filed an amicus brief with the California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District supporting the California Civil Rights Department’s appeal of a lower court judgment finding that a bakery owner did not violate the California public accommodations law when she refused to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple.
U.S. Supreme Court
Mar 2023
Using Religion to Discriminate
+2 Issues
303 Creative, Inc. v. Elenis
This case concerns whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel a business that chooses to serve the public to provide wedding website design services without discriminating against a same-sex couple violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Mar 2023
Using Religion to Discriminate
+2 Issues
303 Creative, Inc. v. Elenis
This case concerns whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel a business that chooses to serve the public to provide wedding website design services without discriminating against a same-sex couple violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Using Religion to Discriminate
Religious Liberty
Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al
After the Washington Supreme Court found that the refusal of Arlene’s Flowers to sell flowers to a gay couple violated Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act, the flower shop sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States. The US Supreme Court subsequently remanded to the WA Supreme Court and on June 6, 2019, the WA Supreme Court affirmed their earlier decision. On September 11, 2019, Arlene's Flowers filed to hear the case again, at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Using Religion to Discriminate
Religious Liberty
Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al
After the Washington Supreme Court found that the refusal of Arlene’s Flowers to sell flowers to a gay couple violated Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act, the flower shop sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States. The US Supreme Court subsequently remanded to the WA Supreme Court and on June 6, 2019, the WA Supreme Court affirmed their earlier decision. On September 11, 2019, Arlene's Flowers filed to hear the case again, at the Supreme Court of the United States.
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Using Religion to Discriminate
Religious Liberty
Dignity Health v. Minton
Evan Minton was turned away from a Dignity Health hospital because he is transgender. He filed a lawsuit against a Dignity Health medical center for withholding medical care because of a patient's gender identity, amounting to sex discrimination in violation of California's Unruh Civil Rights Act.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Using Religion to Discriminate
Religious Liberty
Dignity Health v. Minton
Evan Minton was turned away from a Dignity Health hospital because he is transgender. He filed a lawsuit against a Dignity Health medical center for withholding medical care because of a patient's gender identity, amounting to sex discrimination in violation of California's Unruh Civil Rights Act.
U.S. Supreme Court
Oct 2021
Using Religion to Discriminate
Does v. Mills
Whether a COVID-19 vaccine requirement for Maine healthcare workers is unconstitutional because it does not include a religious exemption.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Oct 2021
Using Religion to Discriminate
Does v. Mills
Whether a COVID-19 vaccine requirement for Maine healthcare workers is unconstitutional because it does not include a religious exemption.