(LifeSiteNews) — The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Mayo Clinic after it coerced a Christian employee into getting the COVID-19 jab.
The lawsuit, filed on July 30, accuses the Minnesota-based clinic of violating the civil rights of security guard Cody Schultz by rejecting his religious exemption request from a COVID shot mandate in 2021. Schultz, a member of the Assemblies of God church, said taking the shot conflicted with his religious beliefs.
He eventually took the jab after exhausting his options to get exempted – including offering to wear a mask and submit to regular testing. He also had already contracted COVID, meaning he likely had the antibodies.
The Mayo Clinic, according to the lawsuit, violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires employers to protect the religious practices of employees, unless there is an “undue hardship” that would arise. The lawsuit also cites Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which allows for workers to seek damages for discrimination. In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in Groff v. DeJoy that employers must prove accommodations would create an “undue hardship,” not just a minimal cost, in order to reject them.
“The Charging Party [Schultz] requested the accommodation based on his religious practice arising out of his sincerely held religious belief, and granting the Charging Party the accommodation would not have imposed an undue hardship on Mayo,” the lawsuit states. “Mayo further discriminated against the Charging Party by giving him a final termination warning after denying his religious accommodation and forcing him to violate his religious observance in order to avoid termination.”
“Mayo failed to provide the Charging Party with his requested reasonable accommodation or with any other reasonable accommodation,” the lawsuit further alleged. “Granting the Charging Party’s reasonable accommodation would not have imposed an undue hardship on Mayo.”
EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas provided further comment in a news release.
“Employees have a right to request reasonable religious accommodations without fear of punishment or termination, including for vaccination policies,” Lucas stated in a news release. “Effectively forcing employees to submit to vaccinations against sincerely held religious beliefs can violate federal civil rights laws. The EEOC will hold employers accountable for such violations of Title VII.”
The clinic declined to comment, “due to pending litigation,” according to CBS News.
An employment law firm provided further commentary on the lawsuit and the importance of businesses providing reasonable accommodations.
“This case underscores that employees have a right to request religious accommodations without fear of job loss, and that employers must take such requests seriously,” McKinney Law Firm in Texas wrote in a brief analysis. “It also highlights how recent legal developments – especially the 2023 Groff decision – have raised the standard for what counts as undue hardship and strengthened protections under Title VII.”
“With vaccine mandates largely a thing of the past, many may think these issues are settled. But religious accommodation claims continue, especially in healthcare and public service,” the firm wrote. “Employers should review their exemption policies, ensure they assess the sincerity of beliefs with care, and engage in good‑faith dialogue – not dismissal – when presented with accommodation requests.”
Meanwhile, the COVID shot continues to face questions over both its safety and efficacy. Despite claims from purported public health experts, the shot does not prevent the contraction or transmission of COVID-19. The jabs have also been linked to heart problems, cancer, and death.
Mayo Clinic pushed COVID jabs on patients, employees
In addition to Christian employees, the Mayo Clinic also heavily pushed the COVID shots onto patients.
As previously reported by LifeSiteNews, the clinic denied a lung transplant request to a mother because she declined to get the COVID shots.
“If you want to be considered for a lung evaluation, you will first need to obtain this vaccination and provide proof that it has been obtained,” the Clinic told a patient in 2024.
The Mayo Clinic is also heavily involved in unscientific surgical and chemical mutilation of gender-confused kids.
Researchers at the clinic reportedly provided transgender procedures to a two-year-old, whom they claimed had gender dysphoria. Their study found puberty blockers had an adverse effect on boys, stunting sperm production.
