The article reads, “Boston litigator Andrew R. Dennington, who represents employers, viewed the case as a primer on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim.”
“What you see here is the 1st Circuit policing the 12(b)(6) boundary,” Dennington said. “As much as Hasbro had a lot of reasons to enforce the policy that it had, let’s say there was another employee who did not believe in taking the vaccine, but their belief was not grounded in religion. Would Hasbro have responded the same way? It’s plausible [from the facts alleged by the plaintiffs] that its response to these two employees was made harsher by the fact that they just didn’t like the plaintiffs’ [religious beliefs].”
For the entire article (subscription required): Click Here
Share with your network:
