Fired for Being an Atheist? What This Case Tells Us About the Future of Religious Protections in America

A recent case out of Denver, Colorado, has drawn attention to a troubling issue: the potential for discrimination against atheists in the workplace and the implications of a shifting landscape in civil rights protections. Austin Ray, a former employee of Denver's Department of Transportation and Infrastructure, claims he was harassed and ultimately fired because of his lack of religious belief. His lawsuit alleges religious discrimination and retaliation, citing protections under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.​

This case raises important questions: How secure are the legal protections for atheists and other non-religious individuals in the U.S.? And how might these protections be affected by a government that increasingly prioritizes certain religious groups over others?​

Understanding Title VII and Religious Discrimination Protections

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employees are protected from discrimination based on religion. This protection extends to all religious beliefs, including atheism and agnosticism. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has consistently ruled that religious discrimination laws apply not only to those who practice a religion but also to those who explicitly reject religious beliefs. Employers are prohibited from taking adverse action—such as termination, demotion, or harassment—based on an employee’s religious or non-religious stance.​

In Ray’s case, he alleges that after reporting religious harassment at a staff holiday party, he faced retaliation that led to his termination. If true, this would be a direct violation of federal law. His lawsuit seeks to hold the city accountable, but the outcome could set a precedent for future cases involving non-religious individuals.​

A Shifting Legal Landscape: Religious Freedom or Religious Favoritism?

While the First Amendment guarantees religious freedom for all Americans, recent policy shifts have increasingly blurred the line between protecting religious liberty and privileging specific religious groups. The expansion of religious exemptions in government policies has raised concerns that civil rights protections may be weakened, particularly for those who do not adhere to the dominant religious beliefs in the country.​

Donald Trump has made no secret of his administration’s preference for promoting Christianity as a central part of American identity. His executive orders and policies have reflected this stance, including the expansion of religious exemptions that allow businesses and organizations to discriminate under the pretense of religious freedom. The 2017 executive order on religious liberty, for example, made it easier for religious groups to obtain federal funding while avoiding anti-discrimination requirements. Additionally, his administration supported legal cases aimed at allowing businesses to refuse services based on religious beliefs, further eroding protections for non-religious individuals.​

Furthermore, Trump’s appointments to key positions reflect a broader shift toward embedding Christian nationalism within government institutions. Pete Hegseth, a vocal proponent of intertwining Christianity with governance, has been placed in influential circles, promoting policies that prioritize religious interests in federal decision-making. The increasing presence of such figures in government raises concerns that institutions originally designed to uphold secular governance are being reshaped to favor a singular religious perspective.​

Given that cases like Austin Ray’s involve government employees, there is an added risk that public sector workplaces could become even more hostile to non-religious employees if federal oversight diminishes. With the increasing use of religious liberty arguments to justify employment decisions, non-religious employees may find themselves with fewer avenues for legal recourse.​

The Road Ahead: Protecting Atheist and Secular Rights

The fight against religious discrimination is far from over. While Title VII remains a powerful tool for protecting workers, its effectiveness depends on the courts and the agencies tasked with enforcing it. If the Supreme Court, which has become increasingly conservative, continues ruling in favor of religious exemptions, it could make it harder for atheists and non-religious individuals to challenge workplace discrimination.​

Moreover, policies that prioritize religious exemptions over equal protection could embolden employers who might otherwise hesitate to take action against employees based on their religious or non-religious beliefs.​

What Can Be Done?

To ensure that protections under Title VII remain intact, secular organizations, civil rights groups, and individuals must stay vigilant. Legal advocacy, political engagement, and public awareness campaigns are necessary to push back against attempts to weaken anti-discrimination laws.​

Cases like Austin Ray’s highlight why these protections matter. No one should fear losing their job because they do not subscribe to a religious belief. If religious freedom is to mean anything, it must apply to everyone—not just those who believe in a god.​

As we move forward, the stakes for religious equality in America are higher than ever. Whether the country continues to uphold the foundational principles of secular governance or shifts toward an increasingly theocratic interpretation of "religious liberty" will depend on the policies implemented in the years ahead.