On October 16, 2026, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Plaintiff John Doe, represented by AJ Hill and Shannon Leary of Gilbert Employment Law, along with co-counsels Anthony May of Nusinov Smith, LLP, and Eve Hill and Lauren DiMartino of Brown Goldstein & Levy. Plaintiff Doe, a gay man married to a man, is a former employee of Catholic Relief Services (CRS). Prior to employment with CRS, Doe disclosed his sexual orientation and marital status to CRS, and CRS assured Doe that its employer-provided insurance would be available to Doe’s husband. CRS did initially provide coverage to Doe’s husband, but after five months, CRS advised Doe that allowing his husband’s enrollment was a mistake and that the coverage would be rescinded. CRS explained it was because providing dependent benefits to Doe’s husband was contrary to its religious beliefs.
Based on the refusal to provide benefits to his husband, Doe filed a lawsuit in federal court, alleging numerous violations of state and federal law, including discrimination based on sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and discrimination based on sex and sexual orientation in violation of the Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act (MFEPA). Plaintiff prevailed on summary judgment on his Title VII claim, and prevailed on his MFEPA claim after trial before the court. CRS appealed.
In its October 16, 2026, decision, the Fourth Circuit upheld the lower court’s rulings, finding that CRS discriminated against Doe based on sex and sexual orientation, in violation of Title VII and MFEPA. The Court recognized the importance of CRS’s ability to make religiously motivated decisions in certain scenarios, but found none of those scenarios were present in this matter. As such, the Court found that CRS’s efforts to invoke both statutory and constitutional affirmative defenses failed, and that it is liable for discrimination against Doe under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and MFEPA.