8 religious rights stories that define summer 2025

Summary

This roundup reviews eight court and workplace disputes from summer 2025 that have pushed religious rights into the spotlight. Cases range from challenges to vaccine-exemption denials and alleged censorship of religious expression, to litigation over transgender accommodations, alleged antisemitism at a university, and judicial limits on employer-mandated religious training. The EEOC has signalled renewed emphasis on religious rights enforcement, and several appellate courts have applied recent Supreme Court shifts in the legal standard for religious claims.

Key Points

Federal agencies and employees are increasingly litigating religious-accommodation and discrimination claims across diverse contexts.
The EEOC has emphasised religious freedom enforcement under current leadership, indicating potential for more agency action.
The 5th Circuit held that a judge exceeded authority in ordering Southwest lawyers to take religious-liberty training; parts of a jury verdict were reversed.
A gay, Christian in-house lawyer alleges he was fired after posting criticism of transgender policies tied to a DEI partner organisation.
An employee alleges Meta disciplined Muslim pro-Palestinian posts while non-Muslim speech went unpunished, raising free-expression and unequal-treatment claims.
Claims of antisemitic harassment and retaliation at Stanford resulted in litigation, with the university saying its investigation found allegations unsubstantiated.
The 10th Circuit dismissed a Christian ERG’s bias claim over a biblical conduct requirement, applying the updated pleading standard from the Supreme Court.
The 7th Circuit revived a Christian teacher’s accommodation claim where the teacher sought to call students by last names rather than chosen, transgender names.
A court granted broader pregnancy-law exceptions to a Catholic bishops group, shielding them from having to accommodate abortion- or contraception-related services.
A Chicago transit worker won a jury verdict after being denied a COVID-19 vaccine exemption, reflecting ongoing vaccine-related religious-exemption disputes.

Content summary

The article compiles short reports on each case, highlighting the legal posture and the practical workplace issues implicated: religious accommodation requests (vaccine refusals, name-use policies), alleged disparate discipline for religiously motivated expression, and the judicial balancing act between anti-discrimination rules and asserted religious liberties. It also notes the EEOC’s renewed public focus on religious-rights enforcement and the potential impact of an expected commissioner confirmation on agency action.

Several appellate decisions from circuits including the 5th, 7th and 10th applied or clarified legal standards that employers, HR teams and counsel must watch — particularly after recent Supreme Court shifts that make pleading religious claims easier in some instances. The roundup links to the individual stories for deeper reading on each episode.

Context and relevance

Why this matters: these stories show religious-rights litigation touching many HR pain points — health and safety rules, diversity and inclusion programmes, employee social-media activity, ERGs, and university discipline. For employers, the trend means increased legal risk and a need to revisit policies, accommodation processes and training to manage competing rights: employees’ religious beliefs, other employees’ safety and dignity, and employers’ operational needs.

Why should I read this?

If you work in HR, employment law or manage teams, this is a neat digest that saves you scrolling through eight separate reports. It gives the headlines, the legal trends and the bits that will actually affect how you draft policies and handle accommodation requests — quick, useful and no-nonsense.