by Jorge Gomez • 3 minutes
First Liberty secured an important victory this week for a group of Muslim and Jewish first responders in Washington, D.C. We represent two firefighters and two paramedics who are compelled by their respective faiths to wear facial hair. Since 2007, these men have been protected by a permanent injunction, prohibiting the District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department from requiring that they be clean shaven in violation of their religious beliefs. But in early 2020, the Department defied that order.
On Tuesday, the federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a unanimous decision in favor of our clients. The appellate court overturned a lower court ruling and sent the case back for reconsideration. The ruling noted that “the district court applied the wrong legal framework” when it reviewed the case.
In 2007, these first responders (and others who have since retired or moved to other jobs) won a permanent injunction under federal law that protected their religious freedom to wear a beard while on duty. That order permanently forbade the Department from enforcing the facial hair policy against the first responders and ordered that they be returned to their “field” positions.
In March 2020, in light of COVID, the Department instituted a new safety bulletin establishing the same clean shaven policy. Those who would not shave for religious reasons were moved to “operations,” which resulted in being paid less. Although the Department asserted that its actions were justified by the COVID-19 pandemic, it did not consider other alternatives for complying with the injunction and failed to ask the court’s permission before violating it.
As a result, our clients – who collectively had provided more than 100 years of distinguished service to the Department and District residents – were unable to perform the firefighting and paramedic roles that they had dedicated their careers to. They also had fewer opportunities for overtime, and—as they switched from working 24-hours on and 72-hours off to an 8-hour work day—their schedules were significantly disrupted. And worst of all, they felt like the legacy they thought they were leaving at the Department on behalf of religious liberty had been erased.
The District’s flagrant disobedience lasted until October 2021, when through the efforts of First Liberty and the law firm Covington & Burling LLP the District returned them to their field positions. However, the District refused to compensate them for the injury caused through its defiance of the injunction, So in November 2022, we asked a federal district court to hold D.C. in contempt of court for violating the injunction and to award damages to our clients. The district court said the Department “may” have violated the injunction but it refused to hold the Department in contempt, applying the wrong legal standard to simply say that the Department had acted in a reasonably cautious way and any damages would be de minimus.
This week, the three-judge panel from the court of appeals held that the district court “abused its discretion” because “the district court was required to adjudicate whether there was a violation of the injunction, or whether a recognized defense to contempt applied.” It went on to explain, “violating an injunction ‘in a reasonably cautious way,’ … is not a recognized defense to civil contempt,” nor is the amount of damages or alleged good faith. Therefore, it instructed the district court to reconsider the case under the proper standard.
While additional work remains to be done, this week’s decision is a win and a crucial step forward in this legal battle. Our clients now have an opportunity to go back to the lower court and prove that their employer violated their rights by ignoring the permanent injunction.
“We applaud the appellate court for recognizing that violating an injunction in what the lower court called ‘a reasonably cautious way’ is not a recognized defense to civil contempt,” said First Liberty Counsel Becky Dummermuth. “This is a victory for all Americans, affirming that courts do not have discretion to simply overlook when the government infringes on civil rights in defiance of a court order.”
First responders make tremendous sacrifices to keep our neighborhoods safe. They shouldn’t be forced to violate their religious beliefs in order to serve. Our nation’s laws ensure they don’t have to face that difficult choice.
After many years of fighting in court, we have an opportunity to secure a final and complete victory for these first responders. But this legal battle isn’t over yet. Our clients need your continued support. You can help our legal team secure a win that protects not just our clients, but all public employees.
Will you stand with them by making a timely donation today? Please give to First Liberty.
 |
|
|
