Summary
This Second Circuit opinion addresses a constitutional challenge by several religious and pro-life organizations against New York Labor Law Section 203-e, which prohibits employment discrimination based on reproductive health decisions. Relying on its prior decision in Slattery v. Hochul, the court vacates the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ expressive association claim and their summary judgment victory regarding the Act’s notice provision, remanding for further proceedings to determine if the plaintiffs plausibly alleged an associational-rights claim under the new precedent. The court affirms the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ free speech and free exercise claims.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Act's expressive‑association claim is viable under Slattery v. Hochul.
- Whether the Act's Notice Provision violates the First Amendment's free‑speech clause and is subject to strict scrutiny.
- Whether the Act's free‑speech and free‑exercise claims are barred.
Holdings
- The dismissal of the plaintiffs' expressive‑association claim is vacated and the case is remanded for the district court to determine whether any plaintiff has plausibly alleged such a claim under Slattery.
- The district court's summary‑judgment grant and permanent injunction on the Notice Provision are vacated and the matter is remanded for further proceedings.
- The district court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' free‑speech and free‑exercise claims is affirmed.
Key quotations
“The right to expressive association allows Evergreen to determine that its message will be effectively conveyed only by employees who sincerely share its views.” (61 F.4th at 288)
“We vacate the dismissal of Plaintiffs’ expressive‑association claim, the grant of summary‑judgment to Plaintiffs as to the Act’s Notice Provision, and the permanent injunction. We remand for the District Court to determine whether any Plaintiff has plausibly alleged an expressive‑association claim under Slattery.” (125 F.4th at 49)
Factual background
The plaintiffs—CompassCare, NIFLA, and First Bible Baptist Church—are religiously motivated pro‑life organizations that argue New York Labor Law §203‑e prohibits them from hiring or retaining employees whose reproductive‑health decisions conflict with the organizations' mission. The district court dismissed their constitutional claims and enjoined enforcement of the Act's Notice Provision.
Procedural history
The district court granted the State's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' expressive‑association, speech, free‑exercise, religious‑autonomy, and vagueness claims and entered a permanent injunction against the Act's Notice Provision. The Court later decided Slattery v. Hochul, which held that an employer may have an associational‑rights claim under the Act. On remand, this Court vacated the dismissal of the expressive‑association claim, vacated summary judgment and the injunction on the Notice Provision, and affirmed the dismissal of the free‑speech and free‑exercise claims.
Remand instructions
The district court shall determine whether any plaintiff has plausibly alleged an expressive‑association claim under Slattery and, if so, evaluate the applicability of the Notice Provision to that plaintiff.