American court supports Muslim V. Clothes shop

[TheRealJoeFish]

Roughly, the Court ruled that she did not have to ask for a religious exemption in order to prevent A&F from denying her a job based on her headscarf. The pertinent facts were:

1) A&F had a "no hats/headwear" policy (not to mention a lot of other appearance policies).
2) Plaintiff applied for a job while wearing a hijab.
3) It never came up during the interview that she was wearing the hijab for religious reasons.
4) A&F (correctly) assumed she was wearing the hijab for religious reasons, and denied her based on the "no headwear" policy, because she had not asked for a religious accommodation.
5) Plaintiff sued for violation of religious rights.
6) A&F responded: she never asked for an accommodation.

So, the question is, do you have to have asked for an accommodation in order to bring this kind of claim? The Supreme Court, overturning the Circuit Court, said no. The rough reasoning, if I recall correctly, was "clearly, if you have a reasonable belief that someone's behavior is protected by antidiscrimination law, you can't fire them (or refuse to hire them) for it even though they haven't come out and assured you it is."

I think it was CJ Roberts who asked A&F something along the lines of "so, if a Sikh man with a turban, a Muslim with a turban, and a Nun walked into A&F, the burden would be on them to explain to you that they weren't just wearing those things as a fashion statement?"

Edit: Do note that, after the decision was announced, A&F was quick to point out that the Plaintiff hadn't won her discrimination claim, she'd just won the right to bring it in court.