No. 22-737

Brian A. Truskey v. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-02-07
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: employment employment-discrimination first-amendment religious-freedom-restoration-act sixth-circuit social-security-number tax-reporting title-vii
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity EmploymentDiscrimina
Latest Conference: 2023-06-22 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the government's requirement that an individual possess a valid Social Security Number imposes a substantial burden on Petitioner's religious liberty in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Constitution guarantees that all citizens may enjoy the “free exercise” of the religion of their choice. Am. 1. The Court has recognized that the government as an employer may impose some limitations on the First Amendment rights of public employees, see, e.g., Garcetti v. Ceballas, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), but the Court has never recognized a right to deprive an otherwise qualified individual of the ability to obtain federal employment solely because of the applicant’s religious beliefs where the applicant can demonstrate his eligibility to work and to fulfill his tax-reporting obligations. The questions presented are: 1. Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in refusing to consider Petitioner’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim on the ground that it was not fully briefed where the government changed its litigation position in its Response Brief to state that Title VII does not displace RFRA to provide the sole remedy for religious discrimination in employment and Petitioner fully argued the basis for the RFRA claim in his Reply Brief? 2. Whether the government’s requirement that an individual possess a valid Social Security Number imposes a substantial burden on Petitioner’s religious liberty in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act where it does not uniformly require the number for all employment purposes and Petitioner has alternative identification that permit wage reporting and tax filing? ii QUESTIONS PRESENTED — Continued 3. Whether the trial court erred in concluding that Mr. Truskey cannot state a religious discrimination claim under Title VII where Mr. Truskey had a valid substitute identification in lieu of a Social Security Number that would not cause Appellee to violate the law by employing him and Mr. Truskey otherwise stated a prima facie case of religious discrimination.

Docket Entries

2023-06-26
Petition DENIED.
2023-06-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/22/2023.
2023-06-05
Waiver of right to file reply brief submitted.
2023-05-19
Brief of respondent Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture in opposition filed.
2023-05-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 22, 2023.
2023-05-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 15, 2023 to May 22, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-03-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 15, 2023.
2023-03-21
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 13, 2023 to May 15, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-03-14
Response Requested. (Due April 13, 2023)
2023-02-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/17/2023.
2023-02-14
Waiver of right of respondent Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture to respond filed.
2022-11-17

Attorneys

Brian Truskey
Donald Wesley SullengerSullenger Law Office, PLLC, Petitioner
Donald Wesley SullengerSullenger Law Office, PLLC, Petitioner
Vilsack, Thomas J.
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent