Supreme Court declines to hear appeal from Christian fire chief who wanted to make it easier to sue for discrimination
Ronald Hittle, a 24-year veteran of the fire department in Stockton, California, said he was fired after attending a two-day Christian conference on city time. The city countered that Hittle had been instructed to attend a 'leadership' conference and told the high court in a brief that the chief had a long history of disobeying direction from superiors.
Two conservative justices – Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch – dissented from the decision to deny the case.
Represented in part by the First Liberty Institute, which has filed several successful religious claims at the Supreme Court in recent years, Hittle asked the Supreme Court to toss out a 1973 precedent, McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, that has for decades dictated how discrimination claims are reviewed in federal courts.
Thomas wrote the precedent targeted by the case was 'producing troubling outcomes on the ground.'
'I am not aware of many precedents that have caused more confusion than this one,' he added.
Discrimination claims are reviewed under a three-step process under the precedent. First, an employee alleging discrimination must show they belong to a class of people protected under the law — based on race or sex, for instance — and that the company appeared, at first impression, to have engaged in discrimination. In step two, the employer must then show that it had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for the actions it took against the plaintiff.
In the third step, the burden shifts back to the employee to show that the company's stated reasons aren't simply a pretext for discrimination. Hittle asked the court to toss out McDonnell entirely or, alternatively, make it easier for employees to win under the third step.
'The court should take the opportunity to overrule this unworkable and egregiously wrong test without further delay,' Hittle's attorneys told the Supreme Court. The approach, they said, 'has rightly been criticized by judges and scholars alike.'
A federal district court in California sided with the city and the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. Hittle appealed to the Supreme Court in October.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democratic mayors decry Trump's ‘political charade' in DC
The Democratic Mayors Association slammed President Trump's announcement to federalize Washington, DC's police force on Monday, calling it a 'political charade.' 'Let's be clear: Crime is down in most major cities — including Washington, DC — in spite of Donald Trump, not because of him. If Trump actually cared about reducing crime, he wouldn't have made unprecedented cuts to public safety programs that actually work. If Trump actually cared about our communities, he would be working with our cities, not against them,' the Democratic Mayors Association said in a statement. 'But the truth is Trump doesn't care — he only wants to create yet another political charade to serve his own interests and distract Americans from his failures. While Trump may try to vilify Mayors and take credit for their work, Democratic Mayors will never stop fighting to protect and strengthen our communities because that's what they do — they get things done,' he continued. Other Democrats were also quick to criticize the president's actions, calling it a distraction. 'Donald Trump's economy is failing, his Epstein files cover-up won't go away, and public support for his agenda is way down. So it's no surprise that he is trying to distract the American public,' said House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said Trump has 'zero credibility' on crime. The statement came after Trump announced on Monday that in addition to taking federal control of the city's police department, he would deploy the National Guard in an effort to take on crime in the city. The president also announced that he was declaring a public safety emergency in the District. 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals, roving mobs of wild youth, drugged-out maniacs and homeless people, and we're not going to let it happen anymore. We're not going to take it,' Trump said from the White House press briefing room. Under the Home Rule Act, Trump can temporarily take control of the District's police department if he determines 'special conditions of an emergency nature exist.' It is unclear if the administration worked with D.C. officials ahead of the announcement. A spokesperson for Mayor Muriel Bowser's (D) office declined to comment just before Trump began speaking. D.C. Councilmember Charles Allen (D) pushed back on Trump's announcement, calling it 'dangerous' and 'extreme.' 'The President taking over local control of MPD & putting the US military onto the streets of DC under the guise of public safety is wrong,' Allen said in a post on X. 'It's an extreme, outrageous, and dangerous move for our city and the safety of all our residents. '
Atlantic
24 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Israel and Gaza, Held Hostage by Fundamentalism
Apart from mourning the attack on the Nova music festival on October 7, 2023, which felt like it happened while U2 was onstage at Sphere Las Vegas, I have generally tried to stay out of the politics of the Middle East … this was not humility, more uncertainty in the face of obvious complexity. In recent months, I have written about the war in Gaza in The Atlantic and spoken about it in The Observer, but I circled the subject. As a co-founder of the ONE Campaign, which tackles AIDS and extreme poverty in Africa, I felt my experience should be focused on the catastrophes facing that work and that part of the world. The hemorrhaging of human life in Sudan or Ethiopia hardly makes the news. The civil war in Sudan alone is beyond comprehension, leaving 150,000 dead and 2 million people facing famine And that was before the dismantling of USAID in March and the gutting of PEPFAR, lifesaving programs for the poorest of the poor that ONE has fought for decades to protect. Those cuts will likely lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children over the next few years. But there is no hierarchy to such things. The images of starving children in the Gaza Strip brought me back to a working trip that my wife, Ali, and I made 40 years ago next month to a food station in Ethiopia following U2's participation in Live Aid 1985, amid another man-made famine. To witness chronic malnutrition up close would make it personal for any family, especially as it affects children. When the loss of noncombatant life en masse appears so calculated—especially the deaths of children—then evil is not a hyperbolic adjective. In the sacred text of Jew, Christian, and Muslim, it is an evil that must be resisted. The rape, murder, and abduction of Israelis at the Nova music festival and elsewhere in southern Israel was evil. On the awful Saturday night and Sunday morning of October 7–8, I wasn't thinking about politics. Onstage in the Nevada desert, I just couldn't help but express the pain everyone in the room was feeling and is still feeling for other music lovers and fans like us—hiding under a stage in Kibbutz Re'im then butchered to set a diabolical trap for Israel and to get a war going that might just redraw the map from the river to the sea. Hamas's leadership was willing to gamble with the lives of 2 million Palestinians. It wanted to sow the seeds for a global intifada of the sort that U2 had glimpsed at work in Paris during the Bataclan attack in 2015, but it could succeed only if Israel's leaders fell into the trap that Hamas set for them. Yahya Sinwar didn't mind if he lost the battle or even the war if he could destroy Israel as a moral as well as an economic force. Over the months that followed, as Israel's revenge for the Hamas attack appeared more and more disproportionate and disinterested in the equally innocent civilian lives in Gaza … I felt as nauseous as anyone, but reminded myself that Hamas had deliberately positioned itself under civilian targets, having tunneled its way from school to mosque to hospital. When did a just war to defend the country turn into an unjust land grab? I hoped Israel would return to reason. I was making excuses for a people seared and shaped by the experience of Holocaust, who understood the threat of extermination not simply as a fear but as a fact. I reread Hamas's charter of 1988; it's an evil read. (Article Seven!) But I also understood that Hamas is not the Palestinian people. Palestinians have for decades endured and continue to endure marginalization, oppression, occupation, and the systematic stealing of the land that is rightfully theirs. Given our own historic experience of oppression and occupation in Ireland, it's little wonder so many here have campaigned for decades for justice for the Palestinian people. We know Hamas is using starvation as a weapon in the war, but now so too is Israel, and I feel revulsion for that moral failure. The government of Israel is not the nation of Israel, but the government of Israel, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today, deserves our categorical and unequivocal condemnation. There is no justification for the brutality he and his far-right government have inflicted on the Palestinian people, in Gaza or in the West Bank. And not just since October 7; well before it too—though the level of depravity and lawlessness we are seeing now feels like uncharted territory. Curiously, those who say these reports are not true are not demanding access to Gaza for journalists, and they seem deaf to the revealing rhetoric. Examples that sharpen my pen include: Israel's heritage minister claiming that the government 'is racing ahead for Gaza to be wiped out'; its defense minister and security minister arguing that no aid should be let into the territory; its finance minister vowing that 'not even a grain of wheat will enter the Strip.' And now Netanyahu has announced a military takeover of Gaza City, which most informed commentators understand as a euphemism for the colonization of Gaza. We know the rest of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank are next. What century are we in? Is the world not done with this far, far-right thinking? We know where it ends … world war, millenarianism … Might the world deserve to know where this once promising, bright-minded, flawed, but only democratic nation in the region, is headed unless there is a dramatic change of course? Is what was once an oasis of innovation and freethinking now in hock to a fundamentalism as blunt as a machete? Are Israelis really ready to let Benjamin Netanyahu do to Israel what its enemies failed to achieve over the past 77 years, and disappear it from membership in a community of nations built around even a flawed decency? As someone who has long believed in Israel's right to exist and supported a two-state solution, I want to make clear to anyone who cares to listen our band's condemnation of Netanyahu's immoral actions and to join all who have called for a cessation of hostilities on both sides. If you will not listen to Irish voices, then please, please, please stop and listen to Jewish ones—from the high-mindedness of Rabbi Sharon Brous, to the tearful comedy of the Grody-Patinkin family—who fear the damage to Judaism, as well as to Israel's neighbors. Listen to the more than 100,000 Israelis who protested in Tel Aviv this week for an end to the war. Listen to the hundreds of retired Israeli generals and intelligence leaders who say that Netanyahu has gone too far. Our band stands in solidarity with the people of Palestine who truly seek a path to peace and coexistence with Israel and with their rightful and legitimate demand for statehood. We stand in solidarity with the remaining Israeli hostages and plead that someone rational negotiate their release—maybe someone like the imprisoned Marwan Barghouti, whom a former head of the Mossad, Efraim Halevy, described as 'probably the most sane and the most qualified person' to lead the Palestinians Our band is pledged to contribute our support by donating to Medical Aid for Palestinians. We urge Israelis, the majority of whom did not vote for Netanyahu, to demand unfettered access by professionals to deliver the crucial care needed throughout Gaza and the West Bank that they best know how to distribute, and to let enough trucks through. It will take more than 100 trucks a day to seriously address the need—more like 600 —but the flooding of humanitarian aid will also undercut the black marketeering that has benefited Hamas. Wiser heads than mine will have a view of how best to accomplish this, but surely the hostages and Gazans alike deserve a different approach—and quick.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Approval Rating Numbers Have Become 'Very Boring'—Nate Silver
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's approval rating numbers have become "very boring", Nate Silver has said. Writing in his Substack blog Silver Bulletin, the statistician and political analyst said that while the president's approval rating had previously declined consistently, it has now reached a "steady state." Why It Matters In the first few months of his second term, Trump's popularity has fluctuated, with some polls more favorable than others. Sustained backlash to his policies in surveys could persuade the president to change his approach while a plateau could indicate Trump's relationship with the public is becoming more stable. President Donald Trump gestures during a signing ceremony at the White House, Friday, Aug. 8, 2025, in Washington. President Donald Trump gestures during a signing ceremony at the White House, Friday, Aug. 8, 2025, in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein What To Know Silver wrote: "If you're a close follower of Donald Trump's approval rating, you know that last week's numbers were very boring." He said that since August 1 and August 11, Trump's net approval rating has fluctuated between -8.5 and -8.9 percentage points. Previously, fluctuations had been larger. "After the relatively consistent decline in Trump's approval between June and late July, we've reached another steady state," he said. Silver's analysis follows a period of negative polling regarding the president. In July, Silver said Trump's approval rating had "had started to drop more quickly." According to a YouGov polling for U.K. newspaper The Times, the proportion of people who disapprove of Trump's job performance had increased from 52 percent in April to 57 percent in July. According to polling by The Economist/YouGov, the proportion of people who disapprove of the president's job performance has plateaued at 55 percent since mid-July. Newsweek analysis also revealed that Trump's approval rating is positive in 18 of the states he won in the 2024 election, and negative in the 13 other states. What People Are Saying Mark Shanahan, who teaches American politics at the University of the Surrey in the U.K, told Newsweek the steadiness seen in the polls was due to people being "on a break from politics." "Like much of the rest of the Western world, Americans were largely on vacation at the beginning of this month. Congress is on recess and Trump has been golfing in Scotland and elsewhere. He'll say he ended a war, got a great trade deal and Lord knows what else. But at this time of the year, everyone's on a break from politics and the steady state is because for a couple of weeks, nobody really cares. Everything could change dependent on the outcome of Putin's visit to Alaska next week, if it happens. Until then, wars continue to rage in Gaza and Ukraine, prices edge up and the U.S. remains as divided as ever. -8.9 doesn't feel like a golden age." Silver added in his blog: "[T]hat doesn't mean things have actually been slow for Trump. On Wednesday, Trump announced that he plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska this latest round of tariffs also took effect at the beginning of the month. But as usual, negotiations with many countries are ongoing." Speaking last week on the Politics War Room podcast, Alexander Theodoridis, associate professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst said Trump was facing "low and concerning approval numbers." "There's a negative feeling about things," he said. "People don't like chaos." "There's material out there that Democrats can find success in 2025 and 2026 with mostly just in frustration with the current administration and with Congress," he said. What Happens Next Trump is to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday.
