Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Thornton began working for Caldor. Caldor's Connecticut stores were closed on Sundays pursuant to state law. The state legislature revised the law, and Caldor opened its Connecticut stores for Sunday business. It required its managerial employees to work every third or fourth Sunday. Thornton did so for a few years, and then in November 1979, Thornton informed respondent that he would no longer work on Sundays because he observed that day as his Sabbath; he invoked the protection of Conn. Gen. Stat. 53-303e(b) (1985). Under that law: 'No person who states that a particular day of the week is observed as his Sabbath may be required by his employer to work on such day. An employee's refusal to work on his Sabbath shall not constitute grounds for his dismissal.' Thornton was transferred from his management position to a clerical position. He resigned and filed a grievance with the State alleging that he was discharged in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. 53-303e(b) (1985). The Board sustained Thornton's grievance. The Superior Court affirmed and concluded that the statute did not offend the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court of Connecticut reversed, holding the statute did not have a 'clear secular purpose.' The court then held that the 'primary effect' of the statute was to advance religion because the statute 'confers its `benefit' on an explicitly religious basis. Only those employees who designate a Sabbath are entitled not to work on that particular day, and may not be penalized for so doing.' The statute also required the Board to decide which religious activities may be characterized as an 'observance of Sabbath' in order to assess employees' sincerity, and concluded that this type of inquiry is 'exactly the type of `comprehensive, discriminating and continuing state surveillance' . . . which creates excessive governmental entanglements between church and state.'
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co