Brian A. Truskey v. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture

The Constitution guarantees that all citizens may enjoy the “free exercise” of the religion of their choice. Am. 1. The Court has recognized that the government as an employer may impose some limitations on the First Amendment rights of public employees, see, e.g., Garcetti v. Ceballas, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), but the Court has never recognized a right to deprive an otherwise qualified individual of the ability to obtain federal employment solely because of the applicant’s religious beliefs where the applicant can demonstrate his eligibility to work and to fulfill his tax-reporting obligations. The questions presented are:

1. Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in refusing to consider Petitioner’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim on the ground that it was not fully briefed where the government changed its litigation position in its Response Brief to state that Title VII does not displace RFRA to provide the sole remedy for religious discrimination in employment and Petitioner fully argued the basis for the RFRA claim in his Reply Brief ?

2. Whether the government’s requirement that an individual possess a valid Social Security Number imposes a substantial burden on Petitioner’s religious liberty in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act where it does not uniformly require the number for all employment purposes and Petitioner has alternative identification that permit wage reporting and tax filing?