Employment – Vaccination – Religious beliefs

Listen to this article

Where a defendant employer has filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings seeking the dismissal of a plaintiff’s complaint asserting discrimination based on religion in violation of Title VII and G.L.c. 151B, that motion should be denied because the plaintiff employee has plausibly alleged that the beliefs preventing her from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine were religious.

“… The employee must show ‘both that the belief or practice is religious and that it is sincerely held.’ … [Defendant] Southcoast challenges only the first part of this element, arguing that [plaintiff Christine] Bedard’s religious belief is not a bona fide one, but otherwise ‘conced[ing] for purposes of this motion that Plaintiff’s beliefs are sincerely held.’ …

“As an initial matter, the court must ascertain what Bedard has alleged as to her religious beliefs. In her exemption request, she expressed a ‘deeply held Biblical conviction as a believer in, and follower of Jesus Christ to resist the pressure for vaccinations.’ … In her Amended Complaint, she elaborates that ‘to be vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine would be a violation of her religious beliefs because the vaccine was developed using cell lines from aborted babies.’ …

“The court is mindful that it ‘should not undertake to dissect religious beliefs because the believer[’s] … beliefs are not articulated with the clarity and precision that a more sophisticated person might employ.’ … And although the pleadings do not spell out explicitly how Bedard’s religious beliefs are violated by an association with aborted babies, the inference is supplied at the pleading stage by her ‘Biblical conviction’ and assertion that she is a ‘believer in, and follower of Jesus Christ.’ … The veracity of these allegations as to her beliefs and the inferences to be drawn from them are not for the court to determine on a Rule 12(c) motion.

“Instead, the court must determine whether these beliefs, taken as her true beliefs, suffice to allege the first element of her religious discrimination claim, namely that she had a bona fide religious belief. …

“The court finds Bedard’s allegations sufficient at the pleading stage. Bedard alleges that her Biblical conviction is to resist the pressure to be vaccinated, … and that taking this particular vaccine would violate her religious beliefs because she believes it was developed using cell lines from aborted babies. … These allegations, taken as true, are sufficient to state a claim of a bona fide religious belief on a Rule 12(c) motion. …”

Bedard v. Southcoast Hospitals Group, Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 02-058-25) (6 pages) (Talwani, J.) (Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-11728-IT) (Feb. 10, 2025).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.