(Liberty Counsel) — Liberty Counsel filed an amicus brief to the Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal in Marin v. Nemours Children’s Hospital where a former hospital employee is appealing his unlawful firing in 2021 for not getting the COVID-19 shot due to his pro-life Christian beliefs. However, Nemours granted religious accommodations for other theological beliefs.
In 2023, the Florida Commission on Human Relations denied a religious discrimination claim from HVAC technician Christian Marin, perceiving that his religious-based refusal for an experimental shot violated Federal Title VII law and was an “undue hardship” on the hospital. Since firing someone with a religious objection to a workplace requirement is prohibited under Florida law, Liberty Counsel argues that the commission used the wrong legal framework and its decision should be reversed so Marin can receive compensatory and punitive damages for violation of his religious rights.
In the brief, Liberty Counsel notes that the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) prohibits discrimination “because of” religion. While the law is patterned after Title VII, the state legislature did not include the concept of undue hardship in its text and thus Florida courts have independent authority to interpret state law without importing federal law into it. Since Nemours Children’s Hospital fired Marin over his pro-life religious beliefs that prevented him from an experimental shot using aborted fetal cell lines, yet granted religious accommodations to other employees “whose objections it deemed theologically valid,” the hospital violated Marin’s rights under the plain text of the FRCA, wrote Liberty Counsel.
The FRCA provides no such “undue hardship” defense, nor does it allow employers to classify its employees based on the type or content of their religious belief, reads the brief.
Even under federal Title VII, if the appeals court chooses to apply it, Liberty Counsel stated Nemours’ actions still fail. According to Marin’s claims, Nemours violated Title VII’s requirement to evaluate each employee’s situation individually. While Marin was a HVAC technician who worked mostly alone, the hospital treated him the same as an ICU nurse. Nemours justified its decision asserting that unjabbed people posed an alleged transmission risk. However, that justification has been contradicted by scientific evidence and the fact that the COVID-19 shots were designed to reduce sickness but not prevent transmission. With Nemours’ “undue hardship” claim unsupported by science and Marin’s individual role working mostly alone, Title VII does not come to the hospital’s defense, wrote Liberty Counsel.
Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Nemours Children’s Hospital violated the Florida Civil Rights Act for firing Christian Marin over his pro-life beliefs in refusing the COVID-19 shot while accepting other beliefs. Whether the court applies the Florida Civil Rights Act or Title VII’s framework, Nemours violated Marin’s religious protections and should be held accountable. It is unlawful to disregard state or federal law and force people to choose between their religious convictions and their livelihoods over an experimental shot.”
Reprinted with permission from Liberty Counsel
