Search Site
The Supreme Court Decides the Abercrombie & Fitch case – holding Actual knowledge of an accommodation is not a prerequisite to stating a claim under Title VII.

Recall back in April of this year we blogged about the case of Samantha Elauf, a Muslim, who was seeking employment with the well-known clothing chain of Abercrombie & Fitch. A&F you will recall has a “Look Policy” that essentially requires its employees to dress in collegiate type apparel to reflect and coincide with the stores East Coast young adult look.

Ms. Elauf, who is of the Muslim faith, sought employment with A&F and presented at her interview dressed in the traditional Muslim garb that included a headscarf also known as a hijab. The hijab, which you have likely seen before, is made generally out of a cloth like material that is intended to cover or hide a woman’s head and chest. During Ms. Elauf’s interview, while she did not discuss her faith nor request an accommodation, it was reasonably evident to the interviewer that if hired, Ms. Elauf would likely wear the hijab to work, which would contravene company policy. A&F did not offer employment to Ms. Elauf. Ms. Elauf filed a complaint with the EEOC who filed a complaint against Abercrombie & Fitch.

The district court granted A&F’s motion for summary judgment finding the EEOC established a prima facie case for religious discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII prohibits an employer from discriminating against any individual with respect to employment because of that individual’s religion. 42 U.S.C.S. §2000e-2(a)(1). The Tenth Circuit reversed on the grounds that Ms. Elauf never expressly asked for a religious accommodation and therefore Abercrombie & Fitch could not have discriminated against her. The issue of actual knowledge versus constructive knowledge went to the Supreme Court who ultimately reversed the Tenth Circuit holding actual knowledge of an accommodation was not a prerequisite under the statute.

While Title VII does not speak to any specific knowledge on the part of the employer, Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority held that the intentional discrimination portion of the statute prohibits discriminatory motives despite the state of the actor’s knowledge. Motive and knowledge are separate concepts. An employer does not violate Title VII despite having knowledge of an accommodation as long as the employer is without a discriminatory motive when refusing to hire an applicant. On the other hand, an employer could be liable under Title VII where an employer seeks to avoid an accommodation despite having only a suspicion that the applicant will request an accommodation.

What can we learn from the Abercrombie & Fitch case – well if you are an employer you may not consider an applicant’s religious practice when making your employment decisions – this is true regardless of whether you know for sure that an accommodation will be sought.

Contact us

Please fill out the form below and one of our attorneys will contact you.

Quick Contact Form

Client Testimonials
  • "I had a slip and fall in a grocery store and injured my shoulder to the point of needing surgery to repair. The Law Firm made contact with them to make restitution on my behalf. After going back and forth… they awarded me a settlement for my pain and medical bills. The [Firm] were super easy to work with and I would definitely… use them again. I was and am very satisfied with the end result. THANK YOU!"  -Bob S.

  • "When I got hurt at work I didn’t know what I was going to do being a single mom of three. It was very scary and only weeks before Christmas to boot. I was referred to the Pagano Law Firm by my mom and it was the best decision. The Firm took me under their wing and assured me everything would be okay. They handled everything and kept me posted along the way. I am so happy to be back on my feet in more ways than one… my case was handled with such care and the end result was more than I expected. I would recommend the Pagano Law Firm to everyone I know!"  -Jill

  • "We reached out to the Pagano Law Firm after a serious car accident. At the time it was not clear the extent of the injuries and what it would take to make us whole. The Pagano Law Firm attorneys were diligent in the handling of the case and advocated for us not just as clients but as friends. They were considerate and professional throughout the two years it took to bring the case to a close. Ultimately, we were successful in reaching a resolution that surpassed our expectations. We are very grateful to Marlo… and would recommend the firm for any legal concerns."  -M.V.

  • "Excellent. Awesome – very efficient. Thanks for everything."  -J.H.

  • "The Pagano Law Firm put our minds at ease in a difficult situation for us. They made us feel like family & were there with answers to any questions. They made our experience in a difficult situation a good one. Very thankful for the Pagano Law Firm and everyone there. Highly Recommend."  -Richard R.

  • "he Pagano Law Firm was so understanding and supportive in helping with our unexpected situation. We were so grateful to be working with such caring, supportive people. Thank you for all your help and support."  -M.R.

Our Office
  • Media Office
    115 West State Street
    Suite 401
    Media, Pennsylvania 19063
    Phone: 484-442-8750
    Fax: 484-442-8742
Awards & Affiliations