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
![Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania and New Jersey/Trump v. Pennsylvania and New Jersey](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
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.
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2018
![David Mullins and Charlie Craig](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB18-charlie-david-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission
Whether a business open to the public has a constitutional right to discriminate.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
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
Southern California
Apr 2024
![California Civil Rights Department v. Cathy's Creations d/b/a Tastries](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
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.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![California Civil Rights Department v. Cathy's Creations d/b/a Tastries](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Southern California
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.
Apr 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Mar 2023
![SCOTUS April 2015](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web15-blog-liberty-lgbt-flag-1160x768_0-600x397.jpg)
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.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![SCOTUS April 2015](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web15-blog-liberty-lgbt-flag-1160x768_0-600x397.jpg)
U.S. Supreme Court
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.
Mar 2023
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
![Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
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.
Status: Closed (Dismissed)
View case
![Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
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.
Nov 2021
Status: Closed (Dismissed)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
![Photo of Evan Minton sitting on a couch in an office.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2020/02/WEB20-Evan-Minton-WordPress-1110x740-600x400.jpg)
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.
Status: Closed
View case
![Photo of Evan Minton sitting on a couch in an office.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2020/02/WEB20-Evan-Minton-WordPress-1110x740-600x400.jpg)
U.S. Supreme Court
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.
Nov 2021
Status: Closed
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Oct 2021
![Does v. Mills](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Does v. Mills
Whether a COVID-19 vaccine requirement for Maine healthcare workers is unconstitutional because it does not include a religious exemption.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Does v. Mills](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
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.
Oct 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case