Brandeis University is required by law to accommodate absences and work requirements that occur on a religious holiday.
Massachusetts law states “Any student … who is unable, because of his [or her] religious beliefs, to attend classes or to participate in any examination, study, or work requirement on a particular day shall be excused.”1 In addition, Brandeis University policy states “Should a student need to miss class for religious reasons, the absence should be excused.”2
It is unlawful to require a student to prove their faith, including requiring affirmation or documentation of their religious practice from any particular rabbi. In fact, students do not even have to believe in God to be afforded protection by this statute.3
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that courts cannot opine on the validity of any religious practice. Famously, Justice Jackson stated “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in … religion.”4 Additionally, the Court explicitly prohibited courts from instructing juries to adjudicate the truth or falsity of religious beliefs.5 In landmark cases, the Court accepted the petitioners’ religious faith as fact and did not adjudicate it.6
The constitutional basis for this is grounded largely in the Establishment Clause, which states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”7 Affirming the veracity or legitimacy of one religion and denying the same to another would facially violate the First Amendment.
1 See MGL 151C § 2B
2 See Brandeis Univ., Academic Coursework and Religious Observance, § 3, 2026
3 The Court held that conscientious objectors have the right to refuse military service not only if they believe in the moral directives of a supreme being, but also if they hold “sincere and meaningful belief which occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to that filled by the God of those” who get the exemption. See United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944).
4 See West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
5 See United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944)
6 See Wisconsin v. Jonas Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), see also Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682 (2014), see finally 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 600 U.S. 570 (2023).
7 U.S. Const. am. 1.