H onor abl e A
. W al l a c e Tas hi m a, Seni orJ udge of the U ni t ed * St at es C our tof A ppeal s forthe N inth C i r cui t , s i t t i ng by des i gnat i on. P RE CE DE NT I AL

UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

N o. 09- 3093

E QUAL E M P L OYMENT OP P OR T UNI T Y C OM M I S S I ON, A ppel l ant v. THE GEO GROUP, I NC.

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D
. C
. N o. 2- 07- cv- 04043) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J ohn P. Ful l am
A r gued February11, 2010 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , R O T H , and TA SH I M A , C i r cui tJ udges * ( Fi l ed : A ugus t2, 2010)

____ D aw n M
. E dge I r i s A
. Sant i ago- Fl or es E qual E m pl oym entO ppor tuni tyC om m i s s i on Phi l adel phi a, PA l 9l 062 J ames L. L ee C ar ol yn L
. W heel er L orr ai ne C
. D avis E l i zabe th E

. T her an ( A r gued) E qual E m pl oym entO ppor tuni tyC om m i s s i on W as hi ngt on, D
. C
. 20507 A t t orney s forA ppel l ant J ohn P. G onzal es Jo sep h J. S an taron e, Jr. M a rsh a ll, D e n n e h e y , W a rn e r, C o lem a n & G o g g in K i ng of Prus s i a, PA l 9406 W al t erF. K aw al ec, I I I ( A r gued) M a rsh a ll, D e n n e h e y , W a rn e r, C o lem a n & G o g g in C herr yH i l l , N
. J
. 08002 A t t orney s forA ppel l ee

____

OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

S L O V IT E R , C i r cui tJudge

. I. T he Equal E m pl oym entO ppor tuni tyC om m i s s i on (“E E O C ”) a p p ea ls from the d ec isi o n o f th e D istri ct C o u rt g r a n t i n g th e s u mma r yj u d g me n tmot i o n o f d e f e n d a n t , th e GEO G r oup, I nc. ( “G E O ”)

. G E O i s a pr i vat e companythatw as contr act ed t o run the G eor ge W
. H i l l C orr ect i onal Faci l i ty( the
“ H i l l F a c i l i ty” ) , w h i c h i s th e p r i s o n f o rD e l a w a r e C o u n ty, P e n n sy lv a n ia. T h e E E O C f iled its c o m p lain t p u rsu a n t to T itl e V I I of the C i vi l R i ght s A ctof 1964, as amended, 42 U
. S. C
. §§ 2 0 0 0 e , et s eq. , on beh al f of

a cl ass of M usl i m w om en em ploy ees, al l egi ng thatG E O vi ol at ed Ti t l e V I I ’ s pr ohi bi t i ons on r el i gi ous d iscri m ination w h en itfa il ed to ac co m m o d ate the class m em b ers bypr ovi di ng them an except i on t o the pr i s on’ s dr es s pol i cythatA l though ther e appe art o b e m anydi ffe r ents ty l es of 1 khi m ar s , nei therpartyh as att empt ed t o des cr i be the khi m ar s at i s s ue her e w i th any part i cul ar i ty . T he quot ed def i ni t i on i s fr om the compl ai nt , and w e w i l l acc epti tas an ac cur at e de s cr i pt i on that app l i es t o the khim ars w orn bythe clas s m em bers. 3 otherw i s e pr ecl uded them from w ear i ng M us l i m head c over i ngs c a lled k h im a rs a t w o rk . G E O m o v e d f o r su m m a ryju d g m e n t, ar gui ng i n partthata devi at i on fr om i t s pol i cyw oul d caus e i tan u n d u e h a rd sh ip b yc o m p ro m isin g its in stitu tio n a l in ter e sts in securi tyand safety . A l tho ug h the E E O C had fi l ed a cross m ot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent , on appea l i tar gues thatthe D i stri ctC ou rterr ed b ecause q uest i on s of m at eri al factexis t a b o u t w h e th e r a c c o m m o d a tin g th e c las s w o u ld in f a c t co n stitu te a n u n d u e h a r d s h i p f

o rGE O. G E O i s a pr i vat e, i nt ernat i onal corpor at i on that , among otherr el at ed thi ngs , runs fede r al and s t at e pr i s ons i n the U ni t ed St at es . T he H i l l Faci l i tyi n T hornt on, Penns y l vani a hol ds “pr etr i a l d e t a i n e e s a n d p e r s o n s s e r v i n g a c o u n tys e n t e n c e o f two y ear s l es s one dayora s t at e s ent ence of fi ve y ear s l es s one day

. ” A ppel l ant ’ s B r i ef a t3 ( quot at i on om i t t ed)

. D ur i ng the r el evant p e rio d R a ym o n d N a rd o lil lo w a s th e w a rd e n a t th e H ill F a c ili ty and M atthew H ol m , w ho w as hi r ed i n A ugus t2004, w as the deputyw ar den. I n aboutFebruary2008, H ol m beca m e w ar den o f th e H i l l F a c i l i ty. I n A pr i l 2005, the H i l l Faci l i tyi ns t i tut ed a dr es s pol i cy that p rov ided that “[ n ]o h ats o r ca p s w il l be p erm itted to b e w o rn i n t he fa ci l i tyunl es s i s s ued w i th the uni form . ” A pp. at207. T he new pol i cyal s o s t at ed that“[s ] carves and hooded j acke t s or s w eat s hi r t s w i l l notbe perm i t t ed pas tthe Fr ontSecur i tyD es k. ” A pp. at207. T hes e di r ect i ves w er e i nt erpr et ed t o pr ohi bi tthe w ear i ng of a khi m ar , an “I s l ami c r el i gi ous head s car f, des i gned t o coverthe hai r , for ehea d, s i des of the nec k, s houl der s , and c h e st,” w h ich w a s u n til th e n w o rn b yso m e f e m a le M u slim 1 empl oy ees i ns i de of the H i l l Faci l i ty . A pp. at15. T o r ei nfor ce the A pr i l 2005 pr ohi bi t i ons on hat s , head4 s carves and hoods , H ol m i s s ued a mem or andum on O ct ober24, 2005, ent i t l ed “U N I FO R M PO L I C Y , ” thats t at ed:

R e m in d e r! A ll em p lo y e e s, w h ile o n d u ty , w ill if r equi r ed, w earonl yan off i ci al G E O uni form , w hi ch a d h e re s to th e d re ss c o d e a n d sta n d a rd s, d e sc rib e d in Pol i cy300. 19. T hi s i ncl udes , but[i s ] notl i m i t ed t o the len g th o f y o u r h a ir, sc a rv e s, h o o d e d jac k e ts, sw e a tsh irts an d sp ec ifi ca ll yh ats. T h e f o ll o w ing are ex ce rpts fo rm [ s i c ] th e p o l i c y: “ N o h a ts o r c a p s w ill b e p e rm itt e d to b e w o rn in th e f a c ility u n le s s is s u e d w ith th e u n if o rm .” “The U ni form des cr i bed bel ow i s nott o be al t er ed, m odi fi ed, orembel l i s hed upon. O nl yi t ems appr oved by th e W a rd e n w ill b e a u th o ri z e d .” T h o se e m p loy ee s n o t subjected to the u n ifo rm p o licyw ill a d h e re to th e F a c ili tyd re ss c o d e , w h ich is pos t ed atthe Fr ontE ntr ance Secur i tyPost/ I O N Scan. T h is m ea n s tha t al l hats, ca p s o r reli g iou s att ir e w i l l notbe perm i t t ed t o be w orn w i th y ouruni form orby non- uni form ed empl oy ees unl es s s peci fi cal l yauthor i zed bythe W arden. A tthis t i m e t here are no au tho ri zed h at s, ca p s o r att ir e, w h ich c an b e w o rn in side the jail an d there a r e n o e x c e p t i o n s t o th i s p o l i c y. A pp. at215. A f ter th e O c to b e r 2 0 0 5 m e m o ra n d u m w a s is su e d , H o lm and N ar dol i l l o adopt ed and e nfor ced a “ze r o t ol er ance headge ar pol i cy . . . . ” A ppel l ant ’ s B r . at6. A ccor di ng t o G E O , the noh e a d g e a r p o licyw a s a d o p ted f o r sa f e tya n d se c u rityre a so n s to p re v e n t th e in tro d u c tio n o f c o n tra b a n d in to th e p riso n f a c ili ty and t o avoi d m i s i dent i fi cat i on. T h r e e M u s l i m w o m e n e m p l o ye e s o f th e H i l l F a c i l i ty, C arm en S harpe-A l l en, M arqui t a K i ng , and R ashem m a M oss, pr ot es t ed, cl ai m i ng thatw ear i ng of the khi m arw as r equi r ed by th e I s l a m i c r e l i g i o n . T h e y s o u g h ta n e x c e p t i o n t o th e p o l i c y, ar gui ng thatbefor e the A pr i l 2005 dr es s code, theyhad al l been w ear i ng s om e s ty l e of khi m arorhead c over i ng atw or k. A ft erSharpe- A l l en t es t i fi ed thats he had tw o m eet i ngs w i th the 2 w ar den, buts he coul d notr emem berexac t l yw hat tr an sp i r ed at e ith e r of th e m . A c c o rd in g to S h a rp e -A llen ’s te stim o n y , N a rd o lil lo t ook the cons i s t entpos i t i on atboth m eet i ngs that she w oul d not r ece i ve an e xcept i on t o the no khi m arrul e. 5 the A pr i l 2005 dr es s code w as i ns t i tut ed, theyw er e al l pr event ed fr om doi ng s o. S h a rp e -A llen w a s h ire d a s a m e d ica tio n n u rse a t th e H ill Faci l i tyi n 2004. D ur i ng heri nt ervi ew forthatpos i t i on s he expl ai ned thatherfai th r equi r ed hert o w eara khi m ar , and that s he “w as n’ tw i l l i ng t o compromi s e” c oncerni ng the w ear i ng of herkhi m aratw or k. A pp. at43. A ccor di ng t o Sharpe- A l l en, the i nt ervi ew ert ol d herthat“[h] e di dn’ ts ee i tbei ng a pr obl em. ” A p p . at 4 4 . P a rt o f

S h a rp e -A llen ’s in iti a l jo b a t th e H ill F a c ili ty w as t o “g o from cel l block t o cell block” t o “d i spense m edi cat i on” ac compani ed bya pr i s on “off i cer . ” A pp. at45. In e a rly2 0 0 5 , S h a rp e -A llen b e c a m e th e c h ro n ic in f e c tio u s d ise a se n u rse , a p o sitio n in w h ich sh e w o rk e d “ c lo se ly w i th t he doct or ” i n t he i nfi r m ary“w i th the i nm at es w ho had inf ec ti o u s d isease s, su ch as h ep ati ti s, [a n d ] H IV
. . . [to ] m a[ k ]e s ur e thattheygotthei rm edi cat i on, [and] m ade s ur e i tw as or der ed .

. . . [and i n w hi ch s he] di d al l of the PPD s , w hi ch i s the tuber cul os i s t es t , forthe ent i r e pr i s on. ” A pp. at49. “Fr om N ovember2004 thr ough m i d- J ul y2005, w hen Sharpe- A l l en w e n t o u t o n m e d ica l lea v e , sh e w o re h e r k h im a r to w o rk d a ily at ” the H i l l Faci l i ty . A ppel l ant ’ s B r . at8. W hen Sharpe- A l l en w as pr epar i ng t o r eturn t o w or k fr om thatm edi cal l eave , co ll ea g u es c all ed to tell h er tha t she co u ld n o t “w ea r [h er] khi m arw hen [s he] c[a ] m e bac k t o w or k. ” A pp. at52. SharpeA llen th e n sp o k e w ith so m e o n e in h u m a n re so u rc e s a t th e H ill Faci l i tyw ho t ol d herthat“the khi m arw oul d be an i s s ue. ” A pp. at54. A s a r es ul t , Sharpe- A l l en as ked t o s peak w i th W ar den N ar dol i l l o. A c c o rd in g to S h a rp e -A llen , w h e n sh e a n d N a rd o lil lo s poke, the w ar den t ol d herthatthe pol i cyw oul d be enf or ced 26 ag ains t her b u t ask ed if sh e w o u ld b e w il li n g to “w ea r a headpi ece [or ] hai rpi ece . . . . ” A pp. at58. H e al s o t ol d SharpeA l l en thather “j ob w as there, i f [she] w anted i t , [she] j ust co u ldn ’tw ea r [h er] k h im ar,” b u t th at i f sh e re fu sed to w o rk w ith o u t th e k h im a r o r r e s ig n , th e p ri s o n w o u ld h a v e to f ir e h e r. A pp. at59. Sharpe- A l l en t ol d N ar dol i l l o thats he enj oy ed her j ob and thatthe khi m arhad neve rpr es ent ed anypr obl em i n the pas t , butal s o t hats he w oul d notcompromi s e aboutw ear i ng the khi m art o w or k. I n D ece m ber2005, A l l en w as fi r ed on the gr ound t hat“s he had ‘ eff ect i vel yabandone d herj ob’ by ‘refu s[in g ] t o co m p lyw ith [th e] d ir ec ti v e to re turn to w o rk w i thoutthe w ear i ng of her ’ ” khi m ar . A ppel l ant ’ s B r . at10 (qu o ti n g A p p . at 21 6 -17 ). M ar qui t a K i ng i s a M us l i m w om an w ho w as hi r ed atthe H ill F a c ili tyin Ju ly2 0 0 0 a s a n “ in tak e sp e c ialist” a t th e p riso n : th e p e rso n w h o d o e s th e p a p e rw o rk to p ro c e ss n e w p riso n e rs in to the fa ci l i ty . K i ng’ s j ob ent ai l ed s uch dut i es as per form i ng a “benc h w arr antchec k” on new pr i s oner s . A pp. at129. She w o u ld also h av e c o rrecti o n s o ff icers b ri n g ind ividu al prison ers to h e r so th a t sh e c o u ld a sk th e m q u e stio n s a n d in p u t th e ir ans w er s i nt o a comput er . U nl i ke the corr ect i ons offi cer s , s he had no key s t o t he fa ci l i ty . A theri nt ervi ew forthe j ob, K i ng w or e herkhi m arand a ve i l

. T he i nt ervi ew eras ked K i ng i f s he w oul d t ake he rvei l off a tw or k, and K i ng agr eed thatw oul d be acc ept abl e. T her e w as no di s cus s i on of K i ng’ s khi m aratthe i nt ervi ew , and s he w or e i tt o w or k forthe fi r s tfi ve y ear s of her e m p lo ym e n t. I n O ct ober2005, K i ng w as t ol d bya fe l l ow empl oy ee that s he and otherM us l i m w om en w er e no l ongeral l ow ed t o w ear thei rkhi m ar s atw or k. K i ng then ca l l ed w ar den N ar dol i l l o w ho, ac co rdin g to K ing , told h er tha t she “w il l be f ir ed if [sh e] h a[ s] a k h im a r o n [ h e r] h e a d ” a t w o rk . A p p . at 1 3 1 . S tre ss e d b yth is n e w s itu a tio n , K in g to o k le a v e f o r t h e n e x t f

o u r t o s ix w e e k s . W hen s he r eturned, K i ng t ook off he rkhi m aratw or k. R as hemm a M os s began w or ki ng as a corr ect i onal offi cer atthe H i l l Faci l i tyi n M ar ch 2002, a j ob w hi ch s om et i m es r e q u i r e d h e rt o b e c l o s e t o i n ma t e s a n d s o me t i me s e v e n t o c o me7 i nt o phy s i cal cont actw i th them. I n J ul y2005, aft erM os s t ook h er S h ah ad a – “the M u sli m co n fe ssion o f f aith , ” A p p ell an t’ s B r. a t 6 n .2 – a t w o rk sh e b e g a n to w e a r u n d e rn e a th h e r h a t a tr ia n g le s h a p e d u n d e rs c a rf th a t s h e w o u ld tie a ro u n d h e r h e a d

. I n a meet i ng i n O ct ober2005, N ar dol i l l o t ol d M os s thats he coul d no l ongerw earherhead s car f, and thats he w oul d be s us pended w i thoutpayi f s he di d. T her eaf t er , M os s s t opped w ear i ng herhead s car f t o w or k. I n Sept ember2007, the EE O C as pl ai nt i ff, w i th SharpeAl l e n a s th e c h a r g i n g p a r ty , f i l e d a c o mpl a i n ta l l e g i n g th a tGEO vi ol at ed Ti t l e V I I ’ s pr ohi bi t i ons on r el i gi ous di s cr i m i nat i on w hen G E O fai l ed t o acc om m odat e the r el i gi ous bel i efs of Sharpe- A l l en and otherfemal e M us l i m G E O empl oy ees by ref u sing their req u ests fo r an ex ce p ti o n to the H il l Fa cil ity ’s dr es s pol i cythatw oul d have a l l ow ed them t o w earkhi m ar s at w or k. G E O m oved fors um m aryj udgm ent , i n partas s ert i ng the affirm at i ve d efen se that i tw ou l d b e an u nd ue h ardshi p as a m at t er of l aw for the p ri son to al l ow i t s M usl i m em ploy ees a compl et e exc ept i on t o the non- headge arpol i cybeca us e s uch an a c c o m m o d a tio n w o u ld c o m p ro m ise th e p riso n ’s in ter e st in sa f e ty a n d s e c u ri ty an d /o r w o u ld re s u lt in m o re th a n d e m in im is c o s t. T he E E O C op po sed t hat m oti on on the g round that these i nt er es t s w er e i ns uffi ci ent l yfounded, r el y i ng heavi l yon the r eportof i t s expert , G eor ge C amp (the “Cam p R eport ”) , w hi ch gener al l yconcl uded that : “( 1) G E O ’ s pr ofes s ed r eas ons for deny i ng anyof i t s femal e empl oy ees the abi l i tyt o w eara khi m ar l ack mer i tand s ubs t ance ; ( 2) G E O m ade no ge nui ne att empt t o, norr eas onabl e off

erof, an al t ernat i ve met hod ( of w hi ch s ever al exi s t ) foracc om m odat i ng the w ear i ng of the khi m ar ; and ( 3) [ t]h e re is n o so u n d leg iti m a te c o rre c tio n a l re a so n f o r G E O to d en yit s fe m ale e m p loy ee s to w ea r a k h im ar w ith in the sec u re per i m et erof the fa ci l i ty . ” A pp. at219. T he D i s tr i ctC our tgr ant ed G E O ’ s m ot i on, fi ndi ng di s pos i t i ve thi s court ’ s r eas oni ng i n W ebb v. C i t

y of P hi la. , 562 F. 3d 256, 258 ( 3d C i r . 2009)

. I n W ebb thi s courthel d thatthe dr es s code a dopt ed bythe Phi l adel phi a pol i ce, w hi ch di d notT h e D i s tr ic t C o u rt h a d ju ri s d ic tio n u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 3 1331. W e have j ur i s di ct i on under28 U
. S. C
. § 1291. 8 “author i ze[ ] the w ear i ng of r el i gi ous s ym bol s orgarb as partof the uni form ” and ther efor e pr ecl uded M us l i m w om en fr om w e a ri n g k h im a rs o n th e jo b , w a s n o t a v io la tio n o f T itle V II
. I

d. I n gr ant i ng G E O ’ s m ot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent , the D i s tr i ct C our tconcl uded thatther e w as “no meani ngful di s t i nct i on betw een pr i s on guar ds and s i m i l arper s onnel , on the one ha nd, and pol i ce of

fi cer s , ” w ho w er e ati s s ue i n W ebb

. EEOCv . GEO G r oup, I nc. , N o. 07- cv- 04043- J F, 2009 W L 1382914, at*1 ( E. D. P a . M a y1 8 , 2 0 0 9 )

. Th e Co u r ta l s o s t a t e d th a tth e “ s a me cons i der at i ons advanc ed t o j us t i fythe r egul at i on i n ques t i on appl yequal l yt o pr i s on guar ds and empl oy ees w or ki ng i n the m edi cal depart m ent
. ” I d. II. O u r rev iew o f th e D istri ct C o u rt ’s gra n t of su m m ary ju d g m e n t is p le n a ry. Jackso n v. D an berg , 594 F. 3d 210, 215 ( 3d C i r . 2010)

. Sum m aryj udgm ent“s houl d be r ender ed i f the pl eadi ngs , the di s coveryand di s cl os ur e mat er i al s on fi l e, and any aff i davi t s s how thatther e i s no genui ne i s s ue as t o anym at er i al fac tand thatthe movanti s ent i t l ed t o j udgm entas a mat t erof law

. ” F ed

. R
. C iv. P. 56 (c). 3 T itl e V II o f

th e C iv il R ig h ts A c t o f 1 9 6 4 re a d s, in re lev a n t p a rt: ( a) I ts hal l be an unl aw ful empl oym entpr act i ce f oran em p loy er - (1 ) to f a il o r re f u se to h ire o r to d isc h a rg e a n yin d iv id u a l, o r o th e rw ise to d isc rim in a te a g a in st a n yin d iv id u a l w ith r es pectt o hi s compensa t i on, t erm s , condi t i ons , or p ri v ile g e s o f

e m p lo ym e n t, b e c a u s e o f s u c h in d iv id u a l’ s . .

. r el i gi on . . . ; or ( 2) t o l i m i t , s egr egat e orcl as s i fyhi s empl oy ees or9 a p p lica n ts f

o r e m p lo ym e n t in a n yw a yw h ich w o u ld depr i ve ort end t o depr i ve anyi ndi vi dual of empl oym ent oppor tuni t i es orotherw i s e adve r s el yaff ecthi s s t atus as an e m p lo y e e , b e c a u s e o f

s u c h in d iv id u a l’ s . . . re lig io n . . . . 4 2 U .S .C . § 2 0 0 0 e -2 (a ). “R e lig io n ” is d e f in e d to in c lu d e “ a ll as pect s of r el i gi ous obs ervance and pr act i ce, as w el l as bel i ef, u n les s a n e m p lo y e r d e m o n stra tes th a t h e is u n a b le to re a so n a b ly acc om m odat e t o an empl oy ee’ s . . . r el i gi ous obs ervance or pr act i ce w i thoutundue har ds hi p on the conduc tof the empl oy er ’ s bus i nes s . ” Id

. § 2 0 0 0 e(j). T h is c o u rt h a s re c e n tlysta ted : “T o e sta b lish a p rim a f a c ie cas e of r el i gi ous di s cr i m i nat i on, the empl oy ee musts how : ( 1) s he hol ds a s i ncer e r el i gi ous bel i ef thatconfl i ct s w i th a j ob r equi r ement ; ( 2) s he i nform ed herempl oy erof the conf l i ct ; and ( 3) s he w as di s ci pl i ned forfai l i ng t o compl yw i th the conf l i ct i ng r equi r ement
. ” W

ebb , 562 F. 3d at259. “[T] he bur den [then] sh if ts to th e e m p lo y e r to sh o w e ith e r [ 1 ] it m a d e a g o o d -f a ith eff or tt o r eas onabl yacc om m odat e the r el i gi ous bel i ef, or[2] s uch an a ccomm odat i on w oul d w or k an undue ha r ds hi p upon the empl oy erand i t s bus i nes s . ” Id

. (cit ati o n o m itted). G E O d o e s n o t ar g u e th a t th e E E O C f a iled to p re se n t a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e. I ns t ead, G E O ar gues thati toffe r ed pl ai nt i ffs
“ a re a so n a b le a c c o m m o d a tio n , b yo f f e rin g to p e rm it th e M u slim w o m en em p loy ee s to w ea r a h airpiec e in p lace o f th e k h im ar” b e c a u se “ it fu lf

ill s th e sta ted re lig io u s re q u ire m e n t th a t th e h a ir b e c o v e re d .” A p p e llee ’s B r. at 1 3 -1 4 ; s ee Ansoni a B d. of E duc. v. P hi l br ook, 479 U
. S. 60, 68 ( 1986) ( not i ng thatther e i s “no bas i s i n ei therthe s t atut e ori t s l egi s l at i ve hi s t oryforr equi r i ng an e m p lo y e r t o c h o o s e a n yp a rt ic u la r r e a s o n a b le a c c o m m o d a tio n .” ). G E O n o tes th a t o n e f

e m a le M u slim e m p lo y e e f o u n d th a t a h a irp iec e w a s s u f

f icie n t to f

u lf ill th e re lig io u s re q u ire m e n t to c o v e r h e r h a ir. W e a re n o t p e rsu a d e d b yth is a rg u m e n t. T h e re is no evi dence aboutthe pr opos ed hai rpi ece noranydet ai l s about th e M u s lim e m p lo y e e w h o f o u n d it a c c e p ta b le

. W e a re u n w ill in g to d e lv e in to a n ym a tters o f th e o lo g y , an d w ill ther efor e dec l i ne G E O ’ s i nvi t at i on t o deci de on ourow n w hat m i ghtcons t i tut e a r eas onabl e s ubs t i tut e fora khi m arunderthe10 I s l ami c fa i th. G E O does notchal l enge the as s ert i on of the thr ee M u slim e m p lo y e e s th a t th e yb e liev e w e a rin g th e k h im a r is in teg ra l to th e ir re lig io n , an d w e p ro c e e d o n th e b a sis th a t th is is thei rs i ncer e r el i gi ous bel i ef. In re sp o n se to the E E O C ’s m o ti o n fo r sum m ary j udgm ent , w hi ch r el i ed pr i m ar i l yon the C amp R eportand the d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i mon yo f th e th r e e f

e ma l e e mpl o y e e s , GEO p ro f f e re d th e tes tim o n yo f

th e tw o G E O w a rd e n s. W a rd e n H o lm tes tifie d th a t b e f

o re h e b e c a m e d e p u tyw a rd e n a t th e H ill Faci l i ty , he had pr evi ous l yw or ked as the l ead i nves t i gat orfor G E O at th e T af

t C o rrecti o n al Insti tuti o n in T af t, C ali fo rnia. In thatpos i t i on, he w as r es pons i bl e for“i ni t i al cr i m i nal i nves t i gat i on on new cr i m es comm i t t ed byi nm at es , al l s er i ous cr i m es comm i t t ed byi nm at es . ” A pp. at169. H i s “per s onal focus ” w as on “i nt ernal aff ai r s , vi ol at i ons of the rul es bys t aff

. ” A pp . at16 9. H e i nv est i gated G E O st aff fo r, am on g o ther things, h a v in g in tro d u c e d c o n tra b a n d to p riso n s, a n d f o r “ a c tu a lly s el l i ng and di s tr i but i ng contr ol l ed s ubs t ance s t o i nm at es . ” A pp. at169. H ol m w as al s o the l ead i nves t i gat orof “a fai r l yl ar ge di s turbance atthe TaftC orr ect i onal Faci l i tythati nvol ved appr oxi m at el y900 t o 1, 000 i nm at es , ” an i nci dentthathe des cr i bed as “more orl es s a r i ot
. . . . ” A pp. at169. A ccor di ng t o H ol m , thati nves t i gat i on i nvol ved “i s s ues abouti dent i fi cat i on of i nm at e and vi deo s ur vei l l ance . ” A pp. at169. B efor e w or ki ng w i th t he G E O G r oup, H ol m w as a C al i forni a pol i ce of fi cerfor 18 y ears . I n t he y earaft erH ol m w as hi r ed atthe H i l l Faci l i ty , he and N ar dol i l l o m ade numer ous change s t o the pr i s on’ s pol i ci es to a d d re s s w h a t th e yp e rc e iv e d a s th e p ri s o n ’s “ n e e d [ ] t o . . . im p ro v e th e p e rf

o rm a n c e o f

th e f a c ili tya n d th e sta f

f a n d to enhanc e s ecur i tyand t i ght en a f ew thi ngs up. ” A pp. at171. O ne thi ng thatH ol m had not i ced w as thatdes pi t e a l ong- s t andi ng, appar ent l yuns poken ban on pr i s on empl oy ees w ear i ng unauthor i zed ha t s , thatban w as notw el l

- enfor ced. A l though the onl yhat s thatw er e author i zed w er e a bl ack ba s ebal l hatw i th the G E O lo g o o n a n d a k n it ca p th a t co u ld b e u se d o u td o o rs, H o lm h a d o b se rv e d e m p lo y e e s w e a rin g u n a u th o riz e d h a ts w ith “di ffe r entl ogos , di ffe r entthi ngs thatw er en’ tappr opr i at e t o the11 u n if o rm o f th e G E O G ro u p ,” A p p . at 1 8 4 , an d w e a rin g h a ts “bac kw ar ds and s i dew ay s , ” A pp. at183. D ur i ng hi s depos i t i on, H ol m al s o r eca l l ed one i nci dentof an e m pl oy ee w ear i ng a “N ew Y o rk Y a n k e e s b a se b a ll h a t in sid e th e in stitu tio n w h ile in f u ll uni form . ” A pp. at183. T hi s conce r ned H ol m i n partbeca us e of hi s vi ew that“the b a n d in sid e o f

a b a se b a ll ca p is a n e x c e llen t p lac e to h id e sm a ll a m o u n t[ s ] o f

n a rc o tic s a n d s m a ll a m o u n ts o f c o n tr a b a n d . A w ir e , a s m a ll k n if

e , a n yth in g c a n g o in th e re .” A p p . a t 1 8 3
. “[A ] notheri s s ue” he had w i th empl oy ees w ear i ng hat s w as “bas ed on [hi s ] per s onal exper i ence ”: the “i dent i fi cat i on of an ind ividu al w ea ri n g a h at w h en theyw o u ld b e ins ide [ the] se cu re por t i on [of the pr i s on]
. . . w her e w e r el yheavi l yon vi deo s ur vei l l ance . . . [bec aus e a ha t ] di s t or t s the i dent i tyof the i ndi vi dual w ear i ng the cap, w hi ch t o m e i s an over al l s afe tyand se c u rityiss u e f

o r th e p riso n b e c a u se it w o u ld b e e n tirelyp o ss ib le foran i nm at e t o geta uni form s hi r t , puta haton, pul l i tr eal clos e . . . [so that] i t dist o rt s the v iew o f th eir fac e a n d y o u ca n ’t t el l w ho theyar e w hen theyw al k out

. ” A pp. at183. H ol m ’ s exper i ence w as that“dur i ng the r i oti n T aft C orr ect i onal Faci l i tybas ed on the r evi ew of vi deo s ur vei l l ance , w h ic h is w h a t [ G E O ] b a s e d m o s t o f [ its ] i n v e s tig a tio n o n . . . . th e r e we r e p r o b a b l yb e t t e rth a n 3 0 0 o r4 0 0 i n ma t e s th a t[ GE O] coul dn’ ti dent i fy

. . . s i m pl ybeca us e theyhad a ba s ebal l cap on. ” A pp. at184. M or eover , one “i nm at e puta haton . . . change [d] [hi s ] s hi r t
. . . pul l ed [a ] hatoverhi s fac e and w al ked outthe fr ontdoor

. ” A pp. at203. A s a r es ul t , H ol m appr oache d N ar dol i l l o t o cr ack dow n on empl oy ees w ear i ng unauthor i zed h a ts a n d o th e r “ h e a d g e a r.” W hen as ked foraddi t i onal r eas ons forw hythi s no- khi m ar pol i cyw as adopt ed, H ol m opi ned thata hea d s car f coul d be “t aken a w ayfr om an i ndi vi dual and us ed aga i ns tthem, i n any form of a c ho king m ov em ent .
. . . [i ]tcou l d b e used a s a r es tr ai ntdevi ce . . . [and i t ] pr ovi des unw ant ed mat er i al for i nm at es t o gr ab ahol d of and/ orus e aga i ns t[the] s t aff

. ” A pp. at 2 0 1
. A s k e d t o d i s t i n g u i s h th e s a f e ty d i f f e r e n c e p r e s e n t e d b y a “hea d cover i ng” and thatpr es ent ed by“s om eone’ s s hi r tor12 s om eone’ s pant s , ” H ol m ans w er ed thata khi m ar , i f “gr abbed from the b ehind bythe si des of i t , . . . i m m ediat el ybeco m es a choki ng i ns trum ent , ” A pp. at201, as w oul d a man’ s t i e, an i t em of cl othi ng al s o gener al l yforbi dden forany one w ho “has di r ect c o n tac t w ith in m a tes o n a d a ilyb a sis

. . . . ,” A p p . at 2 0 2 . H o lm al s o not ed thatbeca us e a “ khi m ar[has ] [a] band r i ghtacr os s the f o r e h e a d a n d

. . . i th a s th e two p i e c e s o f ma t e r i a l th a tc o me dow n t he s i de of [ the] fac e, anythi ng thatcas t s a s hadow on the fac e, be i tfr om above orthe s i de .

. . i tcas t s a s hadow , ” maki ng i dent i fi cat i on di ffi cul t
. A pp. at202. W ar den N ar dol i l l o al s o expl ai ned thatthe j us t i fi cat i on for the n ew zero- t oler ance h eadg ear pol i cyw as i nst i tuted becau se “[w ] e have had s om e s ecur i tyi s s ues thatw er e bec om i ng extr emel ypr obl emat i c. O ne pr i m ar i l ybei ng the i ncr eas ed i ntr oduct i on of contr aband, s peci fi cal l ydrugs , i nt o the i ns t i tut i on. ” A pp. at75. T h e E E O C c h a ra c ter ize s H o lm ’s te stim o n ya s “ u tterly sp e c u lativ e a n d c o n c lu so ry .” E E O C B r. at 3 9 . H o w e v e r, H o lm had s i gni fi cantpr i orexper i ence i n pr i s on admi ni s tr at i on, and thatpr act i cal exper i ence adds w ei ghtt o the conc erns thathe exp res sed as the b asi s for the n o-head gear po l i cy . W e m ust ther efor e dec i de w hetherG E O m ade the nec es s arys how i ng of the undue ha r ds hi p defe ns e. A n “undue ha r ds hi p” i s one thatr es ul t s i n m or e than a de m in im is c o s t to th e e m p lo y e r. W ebb , 562 F. 3d at260 ( ci t i ng Trans W or ld A i r l i nes , I

nc. v. H ar dis on , 4 3 2 U .S . 6 3 , 8 4 (1 9 7 7 ))

. “B oth economi c and non- economi c cos t s can pos e an undue har ds hi p upon empl oy er s . . . . ” Id

. (cit ati o n s o m itted). In deci di ng w hetherundue har ds hi p exi s t s , “[w ] e foc us on the s peci fi c cont extof ea ch ca s e, l ooki ng t o both the fa ctas w el l as the magni tude of the al l eged undue har ds hi p. ” Id

. ( ci t i ng P r ot os v. V olks w agen of

A m . , I nc. , 7 9 7 F .2 d 1 2 9 , 1 3 4 (3 d C ir . 1 9 8 6 ))

. I n W ebb , w e s t at ed thatthe Supr eme C our t ’ s deci s i on i n Trans W or ld A i r l i nes , 432 U
. S. at84, “s tr ongl ys ugges t s thatthe undue har ds hi p t es ti s nota di ffi cul tthr es hol d t o pas s . ” W ebb , 562 F. 3d at260. A r el i gi ous acc om m odat i on thatcr eat es a genui ne s afe tyors ecur i tyr i s k can undoubt edl ycons t i tut e an undueI n W ebb , ther e w as uncontr adi ct ed evi dence th at t he 4 P h ilad e lp h ia P o lice D e p a rtm e n t h a d a “ v ital” in ter e st in m ai nt ai ni ng i t s “uni form as a s ym bol of neut r al governm ent a u th o ri ty, f

re e f ro m e x p re s s io n s o f

p e rs o n a l r e lig io n , b e n t o r b ia s .” 13 h a rd sh ip f

o r a n e m p lo y e r-p riso n . A s n o ted a b o v e , the sp e c if ic s afe tyand s ecur i tyr i s ks thatG E O as s ert s r egar di ng the w ear i ng of hea d cover i ngs i n pr i s on ar e the “s m uggl i ng of contr aband, m i s i dent i fi cat i on and the us e of [ a] khi m aras a s tr angul at i on w eapon i n a conf

l i ctw i th an i nm at e. ” A ppel l ee’ s B r . at17. W e agr ee w i th t he EE O C thatthe W ebb courtdi d not purpor tt o es t abl i s h a pers e rul e of l aw aboutr el i gi ous head cover i ngs ors afe ty“thatw oul d govern i n al l r el i gi ous di s cr i m i nat i on cas es , al l ‘ par ami l i t aryor gani zat i on’ cas es , or e v e n a ll p o lic e d e p a rt m e n t c a s e s .” A p p e lla n t’ s B r. a t 3 1 -3 2
. G E O d o e s n o t d is a g re e . N o n e th e le s s , W ebb is re lev a n t to th is c a se b ya n a lo g y , as so m e se c u ritya n d u n if o rm ityin ter e sts h e ld b yth e p o lice f

o rc e a re a lso im p lica ted in th e p riso n c o n tex t. I n i t s br i ef t o t hi s court , G E O al s o s uppor t s i t s no h e a d g e a r p o licy“ d u e to its e f f e c t o n [ its] le g iti m a te in ter e st [ ] in re q u irin g u n if

o rm ityo f a p p e a ra n c e a m o n g p riso n e m p lo y e e s to pr om ot e an e nvi r onm entof di s ci pl i ne and a n espri tde co rps. ” A ppel l ee’ s B r . at19. I tnot es thatthi s i nt er es tw as ci t ed i n W ebb w her e w e s t at ed “thatuni form r equi r ement s ar e cruci al t o the s afe tyof off

i cer s ( s o t hatthe publ i c w i l l be abl e t o i dent i fy o f f ice rs a s g e n u in e , b a se d o n th e ir u n if o rm a p p e a ra n c e ), m o ra le and es pr i tde corps , and publ i c conf i dence i n the pol i ce. ” 562 F. 3d at262 ( ci t i ng Fr at er nalO r derof P ol i ce New ark Lodge N o. 12 v. C i t y of N ew ark , 170 F. 3d 359, 366 ( 3d C i r . 1999) )

. T he E E O C poi nt s outthatunl i ke the C i tyof Phi l adel phi a i n W ebb , G E O ’ s w i tnes s es di d notr efe rt o the uni form i tyof appe ar ance as justi fica ti o n fo r G E O ’s dre ss co d e p o li cyat th e su m m ary j udgm ents t age, s ugges t i ng thatthi s w as an af t erthoughtthat ar os e onl yaft erthe W

ebb o p in io n w a s f

iled . In f a c t, bo th w ardens did t est i fyabo ut theircon cern r egardi ng the em ploy ees’ la c k o f u n if o rm a p p e a ra n c e , s ee A pp. at77- 81 ( N ar dol i l l o) and A pp. at183 ( H ol m )

. E ven the EE O C ’ s expertC amp concurr ed 4W ebb , 562 F. 3d at261. A l though nei therw ar den i n thi s cas e t i ed th e u n i f o r mi t y o f

a p p e a r a n c e r e q u i r e me n tt o s a f e tyc o n c e rn s , we cannotcompl et ely r ej ectthei rconce rn abouts t aff w ear i ng unauthor i zed ha t s and the need for s t aff adher ence t o the dr es s code i n or derforthe empl oy ees t o p rese n t the appe ar ance of a d is c ip lin e d p ri s o n s ta f

f

. See, e. g. , A pp. at 78, 84 ( N ar dol i l l o) ; A pp. at183, 185 ( H ol m )

. S im il arl y , the conc ern r efe rr ed t o i n W ebb aboutthe nee d forpol i ce t o pr es entan appe ar ance of r el i gi ous neutr al i tyi s al s o appl i cabl e t o pr i s on s t aff , as w e ca n t ake j udi ci al not i ce of the pr eval ence of d iffe rentr el i gi ous gr oups w i thi n a pr i s on. 14 “thatuni form ed empl oy ees s houl d w earonl yagenc yi s s ued vi s i bl e i t ems. ” A pp. at226. I ti s unnece s s aryforus t o deci de w hetherthi s i nt er es tal one w oul d s uppor ts um m aryj udgm ent , as w e decide t he case o n d i fferentgroun ds. G E O a lso a rg u e s th a t th e c o sts th a t itw o u ld in c u r w e re it t o adoptthe ac comm odat i on r eques t ed bythe M us l i m empl oy ees of al l ow i ng them t o w earkhi m ar s w oul d “ca us e an undue bur den w ith re s p e c t to p ri s o n re s o u rc e s .” A p p e lle e ’s B r. a t 1 8
. A ccor di ng t o G E O , thi s i s beca us e “M us l i m femal e empl oy ees can move fr eel ythr oughout[the pr i s on] ” and “ [w ] hen doi ng s o .

. . m us tpas s thr ough num er ous chec kpoi nt s t o pas s betw een se c u re d p o rtio n s o f

th e f a c ili ty ” in c lu d in g “ a p p ro x im a tely [s i xt een] di ffe r ententr y/ exi tdoor s thatar e moni t or ed bycl os edci r cui tvi deo ca m er as atw hi ch vi s ual i dent i fi cat i on/r ecogni t i on i s r equi r ed pr i ort o t he doorbei ng el ectr oni cal l yopened. ” A ppel l ee’ s B r . at18. A l though G E O has notent i r el yconvi nced us thatadopt i ng the pr opos ed ac comm odat i ons of al l ow i ng femal e M us l i m empl oy ees t o w earkhi m ar s butr emovi ng them at e a c h c h e c k p o in t w o u ld re q u ire lo c k in g d o w n th e p riso n e rs in eac h s uch l ocat i on, w e r ecogni ze thatadopt i ng the pr opos ed pr ocedur e w oul d nece s s ar i l yr equi r e s om e addi t i onal t i m e and res ou rces of p ri son o ffi ci al s. I n t he l as tanal y s i s , G E O ’ s no headge arpol i cym us ts t and on the t es t i m onyof H ol m and N ar dol i l l o that( 1) khi m ar s , l i ke hat s , coul d be us ed t o s m uggl e contr aband i nt o and ar ound the15 H ill F a c ili ty , (2 ) th a t k h im a rs c a n b e u se d to c o n c e a l th e id e n tity of the w ear er , w hi ch cr eat es pr obl ems of mi s i dent i fi cat i on, and ( 3) thatkhi m ar s coul d be us ed aga i ns ta pr i s on empl oy ee i n an att ack. T o be s ur e, G E O acknow l edges that“ther e w er e no r eport s of thes e types of i nci dent s at[the H i l l Faci l i ty ] dur i ng W ar den N ar dol i l l o’ s and W ar den H ol m ’ s t enur e[s ] atthe fac i l i ty , ” butw e agr ee w i th G E O thata pr i s on “s houl d nothave t o w ai tfora khi m art o actual l ybe us ed i n an uns afe orr i s ky m a n n e r, risk in g h a rm to e m p lo y e e s o r in m a tes , b e f o re th is for es eea bl e r i s k i s cons i der ed i n det erm i ni ng undue har ds hi p. ” A ppel l ee’ s B r . at17. I n otherw or ds , beca us e “[ i ] n a pr i s on se tti n g , the sa f

e tyo f th e e m p lo y e e s a n d in m a tes is o f to p p rio rity

. . . . [G E O ] s houl d notbe pr event [ed] fr om count er i ng, thr ough appr opr i at e pol i ci es , the r i s ks w hi ch mi ghtbe pos ed bythe pl ai nt i ff[ s ’ ] pr efe r r ed ac comm odat i on. ” A ppel l ee’ s B r . at17. E ven as s um i ng khi m ar s pr es entonl ya s m al l thr eatof the as s ert ed dange r s , theydo pr es enta thr eatw hi ch i s s om ethi ng thatG E O i s ent i t l ed t o att empt t o pr event
. T o G E O , the fa ctthat i nm at es have othercl othes thatcoul d al s o be us ed t o s tr angl e a g u a rd “ d o e s n o t m e a n th a t th e f a c ili tyw o u ld b e o u t o f

lin e in banni ng s om ethi ng el s e w hi ch ca n al s o be us ed as s uch a w eapon, ” es peci al l ygi ven thata khi m ardoes nothave a legiti m ate p en o log ical j u sti fica ti o n . A p p ell ee ’s B r. at 36
. It ar gues thatunl i ke othercl othi ng, “the khi m ari s al r eadyl ocat ed aboutthe guar d’ s head, vi r tual l yar ound the nec k al r eady

. ” A ppel l ee’ s B r . at36. T he argu m ents present ed b ythe p art i es m ake thi s a cl ose c a se . T h e E E O C h a s a n e n v iab le h isto ryo f tak in g ste p s to enfor ce the pr ohi bi t i on agai ns tr el i gi ous di s cr i m i nat i on i n m any form s and i t s s i ncer i tyi n s uppor tof i t s ar gum ent s agai ns tthe appl i cat i on of the no hea dgearpol i cyt o M us l i m empl oy ees w ear i ng khi m ar s i s evi dent

. O n the otherhand, the pr i s on has an o v e rrid in g re sp o n sib ili tyto e n su re th e sa f e tyo f its p riso n e rs, its s t aff , and the vi s i t or s . A pr i s on i s nota s um m ercamp and pr i s on o f f icia ls h a v e th e u n e n v iab le ta sk o f p re se rv in g o rd e r in d if f icu lt ci rcum st ances. I n B el lv. W

olf ish , the S u p re m e C o u rt, alb e it fa c e d w ith16 di ffe r entpr i s on r egul at i ons thatw er e cha l l enged unde rthe Four th A m endment , not ed that“[t ] he G overnm ental s o has leg iti m a te in ter e sts th a t ste m f ro m its n e e d to m a n a g e th e f a c ili ty in w h ic h th e in d iv id u a l is d e ta in e d .” 4 4 1 U .S . 5 2 0 , 5 4 0 (1 9 7 9 ). T he C our tal s o not ed thatpr i s ons ar e “uni que pl ace [s ] fr aught w i th s er i ous s ecur i tydanger s ” and ther efor e the ef fec t i ve m anage m entof a de t ent i on fac i l i tyi s a val i d obj ect i ve thatm ay ju s tif yim p o s itio n o f

v a ri o u s c o n d itio n s . I

d. at559. I n thatcas e, the C our tcaut i oned the fe der al court s t o m ake onl yl i m i t ed i nqui r yi nt o pr i s on m anage m entbecaus e “[ t ] he w i de r ange of ‘j u d g m en t call s’ th at m ee t con sti tuti o n al an d statu tory r equi r ement s ar e conf

i ded t o offi ci al s out s i de of the J udi ci al B r anch of

G overnm ent
. ” I

d. at562. A l though w e do nott ake thos e r emar ks t o det erfede r al court s fr om uphol di ng the con st i tuti on al ri gh t s of pri soners and p ri son st aff ali ke, theym ust be cons i der ed i n m aki ng the ki nd of del i cat e bal ance cal l ed for i n t hi s cas e. T hi s court ’ s r ece ntopi ni on i n W ebb hel d that notw i ths t andi ng the s i ncer e r el i gi ous bel i efs of the pl ai nt i ff pol i ce of fi cerof the nee d t o w eara khi m ar , thatbel i ef w as s ubor di nat e t o t he pol i ce de part m ent ’ s pol i cypr ohi bi t i ng the w eari ng of a k him ar because “‘safetyi s und ou btedl yan int eres t of the gr eat es ti m por t ance . ’ ” W ebb , 562 F. 3d at262 ( quot i ng Fr at er nalO r derof

P ol i ce , 1 7 0 F
. 3 d at 36 6 ). T h e D istri ct C o u rt di d noterrbyr el y i ng on W ebb in g ra n tin g su m m a ryju d g m e n t to G E O
. W e r eac h t he s ame r es ul ti n bal anci ng the r es pect i ve cons i der at i ons her e. W e re s p o n d to th e c o m m e n ts o f o u r d is s e n tin g c o lle a g u e . Ju d g e T ash im a tak es issu e w ith o u r ac ce p tanc e o f G E O ’s exp l anati on that i t s no-head gear po l i cyw as based o n it s i nter est i n s afe ty , i

. e. , pr event i on of the i ntr oduct i on of contr aband, and th e u n d u e h a rd sh ip th a t th e p ro f f e re d a c c o m m o d a tio n s w o u ld ent ai l

. H e has a l engthydi s cus s i on i m pugni ng the r eas ons gi ven b yW a rd e n N a rd o lil lo a n d D e p u tyW a rd e n (la ter W a rd e n ) H o lm f o r th e 2 0 0 5 c h a n g e in p o licy . W e f in d th a t cr iti c ism u n f

a irly c yn ica l. D eputyH ol m had tr ans ferr ed t o the H i l l Faci l i tyi n 2004,17 aft erw or ki ng foranotherG E O fac i l i tyfors i x y ear s . A pp. at 170. I n t hatcapa ci tyhe foc us ed on i nt ernal aff ai r s , vi ol at i ons of the rul es bythe s t aff

, i ncl udi ng, i nt eral i a, i ntr oduct i on of contr aband. A pp. at169. H e had pr evi ous l ybeen a s t at e pol i ce offi cerforei ght een y ear s . A pp. at170. T hus , i ts houl d notbe c o n sid e re d su rp risin g th a t af ter h e w a s tra n sf

e rre d to th e H ill Faci l i tyhe r evi ew ed the s ecur i typr ocedur es . H i s t es t i m ony per s uas i vel yr efut es anys ugges t i on bythe D i s s entthat N ar dol i l l o and H ol m w er e notactual l yconce rned aboutthe i ntr oduct i on of contr aband. H ol m t es t i fi ed thatthe i s s ue of c o n tra b a n d w a s th e su b

jec t o f d isc u ss io n w ith N a rd o lil lo “pr obabl ycl os e t o 100” t i m es . A pp. at173. C ert ai nl ya pr i s on fac i l i tys houl d notbe fa ul t ed form aki ng change s that s tr engthened i t s s ecur i typol i ci es w hen r evi ew ed bya new s etof ey es. T he D i s s entdow npl ay s G E O ’ s cl ai m thatthe acc om m odat i ons s ugges t ed bythe EE O C w oul d caus e undue har ds hi p. T he khi m ar - s w i t chi ng pr opos al s , ei thers w i t chi ng k h im a rs o r re m o v in g th e m a t ch e c k p o in ts, a re f a c ially i m pl aus i bl e and t i m e cons um i ng. T heyw oul d need t o be re m o v e d , fo ld e d , an d sto re d in a lo c k e r n o t y e t av a ilab le. It is w or th not i ng thatther e ar e el abor at e pr eca ut i ons t aken w hen vi s i t or s t o t he pr i s on w earkhi m ar s . A femal e off i ceres cort s the vi s i t ort o t he l adi es ’ r oom w her e the khi m ari s r emoved, the vis i t or i s pho t og raphed , and the k him ar r eplaced. T his process ent ai l s cons i der abl e t i m e and e ffortforthe s t aff , butthe author i t i es deem i tnece s s aryt o pr ot ectagai ns tcontr aband. A pp. at102- 03, 286. T h e D iss e n t ap p a re n tlyb e liev e s it is u n lik e lyth a t a k h im a r m a yb e u se d to stra n g le th e w e a re r. T h e D iss e n t p o sits th e p o s s ib ility th a t a k h im a r c o u ld b e w o rn a s a b a n d a n a is w o rn . See D iss e n t at 1 3 n .1 . T h e E E O C n e v e r in tro d u c e d a k h im a r in to evi dence

. A l though khi m ar s m aycome i n di ffe r ents hapes and s i zes w e not e the des cr i pt i on adopt ed bya s i s t erci r cui tthat sta ted “ A k h im a r is a tra d iti o n a l g a rm e n t w o rn b yM u slim w om en thatcover s the for ehea d, s i des of the hea d, neck s houl der s , ches tand s om et i m es thei rw ai s t , ” EE O Cv . Ke lly S e r v s ., 598 F. 3d 1022, 1023 n. 1 ( 8th C i r . 2010) ( quot at i on and18 ci t at i on om i t t ed) , a des cr i pt i on s i m i l art o thatpr ovi ded i n the E E O C ’ s compl ai nt
. I f thatw er e the s i ze of the garm entw orn by a s t aff m ember , the pos s i bi l i tyof s tr angul at i on s houl d notbe t aken l i ght l y . N ordoes the D i s s entexpl ai n how al l ow i ng M u slim w o m e n to w e a r b a n d a n a -lik e k h im a rs w o u ld e n tirely al l eviat e t he safetycon cern as a band ana, t oo , cou l d b e used a s a w eapo n. A blanketpo l i cyt o p rohi bital l head gear excep ttho se i s s ued w i th t he pr i s on uni form s eems the s ens i bl e s ol ut i on. J udge Tashi m a not es thatki t chen e m pl oy ees w ho f re q u e n tlyin ter a c t w ith p riso n e rs c o n tin u e to w e a r h a ts w ith in the s ecur e fa ci l i ty . H ad the EE O C r ai s ed thati s s ue i n the D istric t C o u rt, G E O u n d o u b ted lyw o u ld h a v e p o in ted to N a rd o lil lo ’s d e p o sitio n tes tim o n yth a t th e re w e re sp e c if ic s a f e ty m e a su re s a p p lica b le to k itch e n w o rk e rs. A p p . at 7 9 -8 0 . In f a c t, the P enn sy l van i a A dm i nis trat i ve C od e provides: G ener alr equi r em ent . E m p lo y e e s s h a ll w e a r h a ir restrai n ts suc h as h ats, h air co v ering s o r ne ts, b ea rd restrai n ts an d cloth ing that co v ers b o d yh air, that are eff ect i vel ydes i gned and w orn t o keep thei rhai rfr om cont act i ng expos ed food; cl ean e qui pm ent , ut ens i l s and l i nen s; and un w rapped si ng l e-s ervi ce and si ng l e-use art i cl es. 7 P a . C o d e § 4 6 .1 5 2 (a ). A n y o n e w h o h a s v isited a p riso n w ill o b s e rv e m a n yp ri s o n e rs w ith lo n g , s o m e tim e s u n ru ly, h a ir , a s ani t aryconce r n addr es s ed bythe gene r al s t at e r equi r ementthat ki t chen w or ker s w ho handl e food w earhat s . M or eover , the ki t chen w or ker s atthe H i l l Faci l i tyw er e notperm i t t ed t o w ear the h ats o u tsi d e o f th e k it ch en . A p p . at 80
. T h e D issen t’ s r efe r ence t o ki t chen ha t s i s j us tanotherr ed herr i ng. T he D i s s entappea r s t o pl ace m or e r el i ance on the t es t i m onyof the EE O C ’ s expertw i tnes s than on the t es t i m onyof the expe r i ence d pr i s on offi ci al s on the s i t e ati s s ue. T he D iss e n t’s v iew o f

h o w a p riso n sh o u ld b e ru n , p a rticu lar lyits m i ni m i zat i on of the s ecur i tyconce rns thatm ot i vat ed the cha nge i n headge arpol i cyatthe H i l l Faci l i ty , runs count ert o the di r ect i on w e have been gi ven bythe Supr eme C our tw hi ch19 s t at ed: R unni ng a pr i s on i s an i nor di nat el ydi ffi cul tundert aki ng thatr equi r es expert i s e, pl anni ng, and the comm i t m entof r es our ces , al l of w hi ch ar e pec ul i ar l yw i thi n the pr ovi nce o f th e le g is la tiv e a n d e x e c u tiv e b ra n c h e s o f g o v e rn m e n t. Pr i s on admi ni s tr at i on i s , m or eover , a t as k thathas been comm i t t ed t o t he r es pons i bi l i tyof thos e br anche s , and s epar at i on of pow er s conce rns couns el a pol i cyof j udi ci al r es tr ai nt
. W her e a s t at e pena l s y s t em i s i nvol ved, fede r al c o u rts h a v e . . . ad d iti o n a l re a so n to a c c o rd d e f e re n c e to the ap propri at e pri son au tho ri t i es. Turne rv. Saf

l ey, 4 8 2 U
. S
. 7 8 , 8 4 -85 (19 8 7 ). A s the en ba nc N i nth C i r cui tr ece nt l ys t at ed, i t s obl i gat i on i s “t o compl yw i th t he Supr eme C our t ’ s di r ect i on thatw e not s ubs t i tut e ourj udgm entforthatof corr ect i ons fac i l i tyoffi ci al s . ” B ul lv. C i t

y and C nt

y. of San Fr ancis co , 5 9 5 F .3 d 9 6 4 , 9 7 8 (9 th C ir

. 2 0 1 0 ) (cit ati o n o m itted). III . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l aff i r m the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s or der g r a n t i n g s u mm a r yj u d g me n tt o GE O.1 E QU A L EMPLO YME

NT O PPO

R TUN ITY C OMM ’

N V . T HE GEO GR OU P , I NC ., 09- 3093 T AS HI M A, C i r cui tJ udge, di s s ent i ng: B eca us e I bel i eve the maj or i tym i s appl i es both l ongs t andi ng C i r cui tl aw on how w e r evi ew s um m aryj udgm entand, in d o in g so , ign o re s o u r su b sta n tiv e T itl e V II la w , I re sp e c tf u lly d iss e n t. T he G E O G r oup, I nc. , a pr i vat e corpor at i on, runs the G eor ge W
. H i l l C orr ect i onal Faci l i ty( the “pr i s on”) under contr actw i th D el aw ar e C ounty , Penns y l vani a. T he Equal E m pl oym entO ppor tuni tyC om m i s s i on ( “EE O C ”) s ued G E O on behal f of a cl as s of M us l i m w om en empl oy ees of G E O , al l egi ng re lig io u s d isc rim in a tio n p ro h ib ited b yT itl e V II o f th e C iv il R ig h ts A c t o f

1 9 6 4 , a s a m e n d e d (“ T itle V II ” ), 4 2 U .S .C . § 2 0 0 0 e , e t s e q . T h e m a

jo rityh o ld s th a t re q u irin g G E O to acc om m odat e the w ear i ng of khi m ar s byi t s M us l i m w om en e m p lo y e e s w o u ld w o rk a n u n d u e h a rd sh ip o n G E O . B u t in r eac hi ng thatconcl us i on, i tchoos es t o gi ve cr edenc e t o the t es t i m onyof W ar den R aym ond N ar dol i l l o and D eputyW ar den M atthew H ol m thatkhi m ar s pos e a thr eatt o s afe tyw i thi n the pr i s on, M aj

. O p. at14, and t o i gnor e the ampl e evi dence i n the r ecor d contr adi ct i ng and underm i ni ng thatt es t i m ony . I n doi ng s o, the maj or i tyfai l s t o appl yours um m aryj udgm ents t andar d of r evi ew , w hi ch r equi r es us t o conducta pl enaryr evi ew of the re c o rd a n d d ra w a ll in f

e re n c e s in f

a v o r o f th e n o n -m o v in g p a rt y . See, e. g. , W

ebb v. C i t

y of P hi la. , 5 6 2 F
. 3 d 2 5 6 , 2 5 9 (3d

. C ir

. 2009)

. T he maj or i ty , thus , eff ect i vel yr el i eves G E O , as the empl oy erand movi ng partyas s ert i ng s afe tyconce rns , of the bu rden of

proving t he ex i st ence o f t he assert ed safetycon cerns, a s w e ll as o f

th e f a c t an d m a g n itu d e o f

th e a ss e rte d h a rd sh ip in acc om m odat i ng pl ai nt i ffs r el i gi ous needs

. I cannotagr ee that th i s a p p r o a c h a n d i t s r e s u l ta r e c o n s i s t e n twi th Ci r c u i tl a w. V i ew i ng the r ecor d i n the l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o the nonm o v a n t E E O C a n d th e M u slim w o m e n e m p lo y e e s it re p re se n ts ( col l ect i vel y , “pl ai nt i ffs ”) and dr aw i ng al l r eas onabl e i nfer ence s fr om the evi dence i n pl ai nt i ff’ s favor , G E O has not2 demonstr at ed thatacc om m odat i ng pl ai nt i ffs ’ r el i gi ous pr act i ce of w ear i ng a khi m arw oul d compromi s e i t s i nt er es ti n s afe tyi n a m annerthatcoul d notbe pr event ed w i thout“w or k[i ng] an undue h a rd s h ip ” u p o n it s u c h th a t it is e n title d to s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. I d. W h e n c o n sid e re d a s a w h o le, th e re c o rd b e f o re u s w o u ld al l ow a r eas onabl e j uryt o fi nd thatG E O di d notm ake a goodfai th eff or tt o r eas onabl yacc om m odat e the r el i gi ous pr act i ce of its M u s lim w o m e n e m p lo y e e s . See i d. a t 2 6 2 . T h a t re a so n a b le j urycoul d al s o fi nd thatal l ow i ng i t s M us l i m w om en empl oy ees t o cont i nue w ear i ng thei rkhi m ar s atw or k w oul d notw or k an u n d u e h a rd s h ip u p o n G E O
. I d. I w oul d, ther efor e, r ever s e the Di s tr i c tCo u r t ’ s g r a n to f s u mm a ryj u d g me n tt o GE O. A c lo se e x a m in a tio n o f th e re c o rd re v e a ls th a t N a rd o lil lo and H ol m ’ s t es t i m onyabouthow , w hy , and w hen the khi m ar pol i cyw as change d i s i nt ernal l yi ncons i s t entand i s fur thercal l ed into q u esti o n b ythe testi m o n yo f o ther w itn esse s an d G E O ’s ow n bus i nes s r ecor ds

. T he r ecor d al s o s uppor t s the i nfer ence thatG E O ’ s s t at ed r at i onal es forbanni ng khi m ar s m aybe pr et extual and ar e hi ghl ys pecul at i ve. T he maj or i tychar act er i zes th is a n a lysis o f

th e re c o rd a s “ u n f

a ir ly cyn ic a l.” M a

j. O p . a t 1 6
. I be li ev e tha t i t i s m ere lythe a p p li ca ti o n o f th e p rop er stan d ard o f re v iew

. T h e S u p rem e C o u rtlon g ag o ad o p ted th is C ir cu it ’s rul e t hat “‘ [i ]f .

. . there i s any e v i d e n c e i n r e c o r d f r o m any s our ce f r om w hi ch a r eas onabl e i nfer ence i n the [nonmovi ng party ’ s ] favorm aybe dr aw n, the movi ng partys i m pl ycannot obt ai n a s um m aryj udgm ent
. ’ ” C e lo tex C o rp . v. C a tre tt , 477 U
. S. 317, 331 n. 2 ( 1986) ( quot i ng I n r e Japane s e El ec. P r od. A nt i tr us tLi t ig. , 7 2 3 F .2 d 2 3 8 , 2 5 8 (3 d C ir . 1 9 8 3 ), r ev’ d on other g ro u n d s s u b n o m . M

a tsu sh ita E lec . In d u s. C o . v. Ze n ith R a d io C or p. , 475 U
. S. 574 ( 1986) ) ( om i s s i ons i n C el ot ex ) (e m p h a sis added)

. “[A ] nydoubtas t o the exi s t ence of a ge nui ne i s s ue for tr i al s houl d be r es ol ved aga i ns tthe movi ng party . ” I d. at331 n. 2. T he maj or i tycl ear l yfi nds the t es t i m onyof N ar di l l o and H ol m t o be per s uas i ve, and bel i eves that , as the t es t i m onyof “expe r i ence d pr i s on offi ci al s on the s i t e ati s s ue, ” i ts houl d be g iven g rea t w eigh t. M aj. O p . at 18
. A tr ier of fa ct m igh t very w ell ag ree , b u t “at th e su m m aryjud g m en t st ag e, th e jud g e’s3 funct i on i s nothi m s el f t o w ei ghtthe evi dence and det erm i ne the truth of the mat t erbutt o det erm i ne w hetherther e i s a genui ne i s s ue fortr i al

. ” A nders on v. Li ber t y Lobby, I

nc. , 477 U
. S. 242, 249 ( 1986)

. “[T] he j udge mustas k hi m s el f notw hetherhe thi nks the evi dence unm i s t akabl yfavor s one s i de orthe otherbut w hethera fa i r - m i ded j urycoul d r eturn a ver di ctforthe pl ai nt i ff on the evi dence pr es ent ed. ” I d. a t 2 5 2 . W e m u st n o t en g a g e in the maki ng of “[ c] r edi bi l i tydet erm i nat i ons , the w ei ghi ng of the evi dence , and the dr aw i ng of l egi t i m at e i nfer ence s fr om the fac t s ” as thes e “a r e j uryfunct i ons , notthos e of a j udge, [w hen] he i s rul i ng on a mot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent
. ” I d. a t 2 5 4
. T h u s, th e p u rp o se o f

m y“ c yn ica l” a n a ly sis o f th e f a c ts is s im p ly t o fol l ow the Supr eme C our t ’ s m andat e that“[t ] he evi dence of the non- m ovanti s t o be bel i eved, and al l j us t i fi abl e i nfer ence s ar e t o be dr aw n i n hi s favor

. ” I d. F a cts C arm en Sharpe- A l l en C arm en Sharpe- A l l en bega n w ear i ng the khi m arand over garm entthatm ake up the hi j ab w hen s he conve r t ed t o the M us l i m fai th byt aki ng hers hahada , near l ya dec ade be for e s he beca m e a G E O empl oy ee. J A 37, 39. Sharpe- A l l en w or e her full hij ab to her N ov em ber, 20 04 i nterview for a po si t i on as a m edi cat i on nur s e atthe pr i s on. A s a medi cat i on nur s e, s he w oul d be r equi r ed t o vi s i tthe ce l l

- bl ocks w i thi n the s ecur e ar ea of the pr i s on on a dai l ybas i s . A ccor di ng t o the dr es s code on re c o rd in th e p riso n a t th a t ti m e , sc a rv e s w e re n o t allo w e d w ith in the pr i s on pas ta ce r t ai n s ecur i tys t at i on. Y etthatpol i cy appea r ed nott o be enf

or ced, as Sharpe- A l l en’ s pr act i ce of w ear i ng a khi m arpos ed no obs t acl e forheri n gett i ng hi r ed. D ur i ng the i nt ervi ew , s he i nqui r ed aboutw hethers he w oul d be al l ow ed t o w earherr el i gi ous att i r e i n hernew pos i t i on, beca us e s he “w as n’ tw i l l i ng t o compromi s e” w ear i ng her khi m ar . J A 43. T he pr i s on dr es s code r equi r ed al l m edi cal s t aff m ember s t o w earm at chi ng s crubs t o w or k, i n purpl e and t eal g r e e n . J A 4 3 , 2 0 9
. Be c a u s e S h a rp e - Al l e n d i d n o to wn over garm ent s i n t he col or s of the medi cal uni form , s he t ol d the4 i nt ervi ew er , “I w oul d be w i l l i ng t o w earthe s crubs , but defi ni t el yw as n’ tcompromi s i ng m ykhi m ar . ” J A 43. H er i nt ervi ew ert ol d herthats he coul d w earherkhi m ar , buthe w oul d have t o as k s om eone e l s e w hethers he coul d w earan over garm enti ns t ead of

m edi cal s crubs

. J A 44. She w as offe r ed th e jo b a t th e in te rv ie w , a n d a c c e p te d it o n th e s p o t. J A 4 4
. B eca us e Sharpe- A l l en agr eed t o w earthe uni form m edi cal s crubs w i th herkhi m ar , no fur theri nqui ryw as m ade a boutthe pos s i bi l i tyof w ear i ng an over garm ent
. J A 44. I n 2005, Sharpe- A l l en bec ame a chr oni c i nfec t i ous di s eas e nur s e i n t he pr i s on. J A 48- 49. I n thi s new pos i t i on, Sharpe A l l en w as no l ongerr equi r ed t o go cel l

- t o- cel l and bega n w o rk in g a lm o st e x c lu siv e lyin th e in f irm a ry . JA 4 9 . S h e w o u ld on l ygo t o cell s i f she n eeded t o ch eck the res ult s of i nm at es’ tu b e r c u l o s i s t e s t s . J A 4 9
. T h r o u g h o u th e re mp l o yme n ta tGE O, s he cont i nued t o w earherkhi m ar . Sharpe- A l l en’ s khi m arpos ed n o sa f e tyth re a t d u rin g th e tim e th a t sh e w a s re q u ire d to g o c e llto -c e ll o n a d a ilyb a sis . O n lylate r, w h e n sh e w a s m o stly w o rk in g in a n o f

f ice se tti n g w ith o u t p riso n e r in ter a c tio n , d id N ar dol i l l o and H ol m cl ai m thatherkhi m arw as a s o danger ous thati tcoul d no l ongerbe w orn. M ar qui t a K i ng M arq u it a K ing h as w o rn a k h im ar d u ri n g all o f th e y ea rs thats he has been a pr act i ci ng M us l i m , fr om 1993 t o 2001, and a f ter 2 0 0 4 . JA 1 2 4 -2 5 . L ik e S h a rp e -A llen , sh e w a s h ire d w h ile w ear i ng tr adi t i onal M us l i m garb. She i nt ervi ew ed forher pos i t i on as an i nt ake s peci al i s ti n 2000 w hi l e w ear i ng a l ong dr es s and over garm entthatw er e partof herr el i gi ous att i r e, as w el l as a khi m arand vei l overherfac e. J A 127. H er in ter v iew e r a sk e d w h e th e r sh e w o u ld b e a b le to re m o v e h e r v e il w hen s he ca m e t o w or k atthe pr i s on fac i l i tys o thatherfac e coul d be s een. J A 127. K i ng confi r m ed thats he coul d r emove the vei l w hi l e atw or k and s he w as offe r ed the j ob dur i ng her i nt ervi ew and i m m edi at el yacc ept ed. J A 127. I tappea r s thatthe jo b in ter v iew e r b e liev e d th a t h a v in g a v e iled f a c e w o u ld compromi s e s afe tyw i thi n the pr i s on and be una cce pt abl e, but w e a rin g o n lya k h im a r w o u ld n o t.5 K i ng w orked d oing pap erw ork i n an off i ce set t i ng . JA 129. U nl i ke corr ect i onal offi cer s , s he di d nothave ke y s t o the f a c ili ty . JA 1 2 9 . T h e o n lytim e th a t sh e w o u ld in ter a c t w ith in m a tes w a s w h e n th e yw o u ld b e b ro u g h t f ro m a h o ld in g a re a to h e r d e sk b ya c o rre c tio n a l o f f ice r so th a t sh e c o u ld in p u t th e ir ans w er s t o i nt ake que s t i ons i nt o hercomput er . J A 129. A s a mem berof the admi ni s tr at i ve and c l er i cal s t aff , K i ng w as n o t r eq u ir ed to w ea r a u n ifo rm . JA 2 1 0
. S h e the ref o re w oul d notbe bound t o dr es s r es tr i ct i ons i m pos ed onl yon u n if o rm e m p lo y e e s, su c h a s w e a rin g o n lyh e a d g e a r iss u e d w ith one’ s uni form . I ns t ead, the dr es s code appl i cabl e t o herpos i t i on o n ly re q u ir e d h e r t o w e a r p ro f e s s io n a l a ttir e a t a ll tim e s . J A 2 1 0
. D ur i ng the y ear s thatK i ng w as a pr act i ci ng M us l i m and w or ki ng atthe p ri son, she w ou l d w ear her khi m ar w i th either a l on g d res s th a t is p a rt o f

M u s lim re lig io u s a ttir e o r s la c k s w ith lo n g s h ir ts
. J A 127. A s agr eed upon i n heri nt ervi ew , s he di d notw earher vei l t o w or k. J A 127. R ash em m a M oss R ashem m a M oss bega n w orki ng atthe p ri son in 200 2 as a c o rre c tio n a l o f

f ice r. A s a c o rre c tio n a l o f f ice r, M o ss is th e o n ly G E O em p loy ee inv o lved in this suit w h o h ad to w ea r a c o rre c tio n a l o f

f ice r u n if o rm , h a d k e y s to th e f

a c ili ty , reg u lar ly w or ked i n t he s ecur ed ar eas of the pr i s on w i th i nm at es , and r es ponded t o us e of f

or ce i nci dent s . J A 155. M os s di d notw ear a khi m art o heri nt ervi ew , ordur i ng the fi r s tfew y ear s of her e m p lo ym e n t w ith G E O , a s s h e w a s n o t yet a p ra c tic in g M u s lim

. J A 151. I n J ul yof 2005, M os s t ook hers hahada , ther eby b e c o m in g a f

u ll- f le d g e d m e m b e r o f

th e Is la m ic f

a ith . J A 1 5 1
. I n l i eu of w ear i ng an over garm ent , s he exc hanged he r corr ect i onal offi ceruni form fora l ar gers i ze “ t o s uffi ce f ornot s h o wi n g [ h e r ] s h a p e s o i twou l d n ’ tb e t i g h t
- f i t t i n g . ” J A 15 8
. To coverherhai ri n acc or dance w i th herr el i gi on, M os s began w ear i ng an under s car f, w hi ch s he des cr i bed as a “tr i angl es haped” pi ece of fa br i c thati s “t i e[d] ar ound [one’ s ] head, under th e h a t th a t w a s is s u e d to h e r a s p a rt o f h e r u n if o rm . J A 1 5 6
.6 M os s t es t i fi ed thatatthatt i m e, “under s car fs w as [s i c] al r eady bei ng w orn, ” s he had a l r eadyw orn one t o w or k on pr evi ous occa s i ons and, atthatt i m e, “i tw as comm on pr act i ce [ among pr i s on empl oy ees ] t o w earthi ngs on [thei r ] head[ s ] , not necessari l yan u nd ers carf, bu ta hat, a scar f, a head ban d. ” JA 157. T he record i nd i cat es that events st em m i ng from M oss’ conver s i on t o I s l am prompt ed the cha nge i n the enf or cementof the dr es s code. M os s as ked heruni on r epr es ent at i ves w hether ther e w as anypol i cypr event i ng herfr om w ear i ng a hea d cover i ng i n acc or dance w i th herfai th and w as t ol d thatther e w as n o t. A R 1 5 7 . H o w e v e r, M o ss d e c id e d th a t itw o u ld b e b e st to confi r m thi s w i th hers upervi s or s atthe pr i s on, s o i n A ugus tof 2 0 0 5 , sh e w ro te a “ lette r to th e c h ief o f se c u rityin f

o rm in g h im that[s he] w as M us l i m , [s he] had [t aken] hers hahada , on w hat dat e, w hatthe r equi r ement s w er e thatw as [s i c] s t i pul at ed on [ h e r] b y[ h e r] re lig io n , a n d w h a t I h a v e to d o .” A R 1 5 7
. R epea t edl yr ece i vi ng no r es pons e, s he cont i nued i nform i ng the nextper s on i n t he cha i n of comm and, eventual l yw r i t i ng W ar den N ar dol i l l o on O ct ober24, 2005.

The Pri s on Dre s s C ode T h e m a jo rity ’s d isc u ss io n o f

th e p riso n d re ss c o d e is i nacc ur at e t o t he ext entthati ti ndi cat es thatthe new dr es s code adopt ed byW ar den N ar dol i l l o i n A pr i l of 2005 cha nged the fac i l i ty ’ s pol i cyon t he w ear i ng of hat s , caps , khi m ar s , orany o th e r h e a d c o v e ri n g s in a n ys u b s ta n tiv e w a y . See M a j. O p . a t 3
. N a rd o lillo d id s ig n a n e w d re s s c o d e o n A p ri l 2 1 , 2 0 0 5
. H ow ever , thatnew pol i cym ade onl yone mi norchange t o the p ri so n ’s pre ex ist ing g en era l gro o m ing stan d ard s, w h ich g o v ern th e w e a ri n g o f

h e a d g e a r b ye m p lo y e e s w ith in th e f a c ility. J A 7 7
. T h e o ld d re ss c o d e h a d p ro h ib ited “ sc a rv e s a n d h o o d e d jac k e ts o r sw e a tsh irts” f

ro m b e in g w o rn p a st th e “ m o u se tra p ,” w h ich is an ar ea be y ond the fr ontdes k. J A 77, 207. T he new pol i cy p ro h ib ite d th o s e ite m s f ro m b e in g w o rn p a s t th e “ IO N S C A N ,” atthe fr onts ecur i tydes k. J A 77, 207. T he pr i s on’ s pr evi ous dr es s code ha d been i n eff ects i nce7 February19, 2004. J A 207. O therthan the cha nge i n l ocat i on at w hi ch s carves and hooded j acke t s ors w eat s hi r t s neede d t o be r emoved, both t he 2004 dr es s code a nd the 2005 dr es s code c o n ta in e d e x a c tly th e s a m e la n g u a g e re g a rd in g h e a d g e a r. T her efor e, ther e w as no m at er i al i n the off i ci al pr i s on dr es s code w i th r egar d t o hat s orheadc over i ngs betw een 2004, the t i m e at w hi ch al l thr ee pl ai nt i ff M us l i m w om en empl oy ees began w ear i ng thei rkhi m ar s t o w or k on a dai l ybas i s , and O ct ober24, 2005, w hen N ar dol i l l o i s s ued a mem or andum t o empl oy ees prohibi t i ng the w eari ng of h at s. T he uncha nged port i on of the pr i s on’ s offi ci al pol i cyon per s onal gr oom i ng pr ohi bi t s “al t er [at i on] , m odi fi [ca t i on] , or e m b e llis h [ m e n t] ” o f

th e s ta n d a rd iz e d u n if

o rm p ro v id e d b yG E O
. J A 207. I tpr ohi bi t ed “s carves and hooded j acke t s or s w eat s hi r t s ” fr om bei ng w orn pas ta s peci fi ed s ecur i tys cr eeni ng l ocat i on. J A 207. A nd i tpr ovi ded that“[n] o hat s orcaps w i l l be perm i t t ed t o be w orn i n the fa ci l i tyunl es s i s s ued w i th a u n if o rm .” M o ss tes tifie d th a t th e h a t sh e w o re to w o rk w a s is su e d to her as partof h er offi ci al un i form

. JA 15 6. U nd er the d res s code a s w r i t t en, s he s houl d ther efor e have been a l l ow ed t o w ear the h at w ith in the fa cil ity . T h is directl yco n tr ad ict s N ard o li ll o ’s t est i m on ythat no ha t s could be w orn w i thin the fa ci l i tybecau se no hat s w er e i s s ued w i th uni form s , as “the hatw as not , pers e, an offi ci al partof the uni form . ” J A 78. N ar dol i l l o’ s cl ai m thata hat w as notpartof the corr ect i onal offi ceruni form i s fur ther contr adi ct ed byG E O ’ s ow n r ecor ds tr acki ng the uni form s that w er e i s s ued t o i t s corr ect i onal empl oy ees . T hos e r ecor ds corr obor at e M os s ’ t es t i m onythathat s w er e di s tr i but ed as partof the uni form s . J A 78- 80. N ar dol i l l o t es t i fi ed thateven i f empl oy ees w er e gi ven h a ts a s p a rt o f

th e ir o f f icia l u n if o rm , the yw e re n o t allo w e d to w e a r t h e m w ith in th e s e c u re d p e ri m e te r o f th e f a c ility. J A 8 3
. A gai n, thi s i s contr adi ct ed byM os s ’ t es t i m onythatvar i ous headc over i ngs w er e comm onl yw orn byempl oy ees w i thi n the f a c i l i ty . J A 1 5 7
. I ti s a l s o c o n tr a d i c t e d b yNa r d o l i l l o ’ s o wn t es t i m onythatempl oy ees w er e “w ear i ng w hat evertheyw ant ed8 to w e a r o n th e irh e a d s ” u n til h e to o k a c tio n to e n d th is p ra c tic e . J A 78. N a rd o lil lo tes tifie d th a t h e b e liev e d th e o n lya p p ro p ria te s i tuat i on i n w hi ch an e m pl oy ee c oul d w eara hea d cover i ng w as if a g u ard w h o w o rke d at th e g u ard sh ac k o u tsi d e o f th e se cu re p e rim e ter o f

th e p riso n w a s g ra n ted h is p e rso n a l p e rm iss io n to w e a r a G E O s k i c a p d u e to c o ld w in te r t e m p e ra tu re s . J A 8 3
. H ow ever , the pl ai n l anguage of the pr i s on dr es s code thatexi s t ed i n 2 0 0 4 a n d wa s r e a d o p t e d b yNa r d o l i l l o i n Ap r i l 2 0 0 5 , a l l o ws hat s t o be w orn “i n t he fa ci l i ty ” i f theyar e “i s s ued w i th the uni form . ” J A 207. H ol m t es t i fi ed that“ther e has onl yeverbeen on e off i ci al hat i ssued w i th the uniform and that w as t o thatfi rs t g rou p o f e m p loy ee s in 1 9 9 8 an d n o n e o f th em w o re itan d it ’s n o t in e x iste n c e a n ym o re .” J A 1 8 5 . T h a t sta tem e n t is d ire c tly contr adi ct ed byG E O ’ s ow n r ecor ds , w hi ch i ndi cat e thata cap cont i nued t o be i s s ued t o corr ect i onal offi cer s atthe pr i s on as partof thei runi form thr ough 2005. J A 80. N ar dol i l l o t es t i fi ed th a t h e d id n o t ch a n g e th e p o licyo f d istrib u tin g c a p s to empl oy ees as partof thei runi form s w hen he r eadopt ed the pr i s on dr es s code i n A pr i l of 2005. Pl ai nt i ffs pr es ent ed evi dence thathat s cont i nued t o be comm onl yw orn w i thi n the s ecur e ar eas of the pr i s on j us tas theyhad bee n underthe i dent i cal and i dent i cal l yunenfor ced 2004 pol i cyunt i l O ct ober24, 2005.

T he I m pl em ent at i on of t he P ol i cy M os s ’ l ett erexpl ai ni ng herr el i gi ous conver s i on and r eques t i ng perm i s s i on t o cont i nue w ear i ng herkhi m arr eac hed N ardol i l l o’s desk on O ct ob er 24, 20 05
. JA 15 7. W i thin hou rs , M os s w as cal l ed i nt o D eputyW ar den H ol m ’ s offi ce t o s peak w i th H ol m and N ar di l l o. J A 157. N ar dol i l l o t ol d herthathe w as deny i ng herr eques tt o w earherkhi m arand w as s t oppi ng e v e ry o n e in th e f

a c ili ty“ f ro m w e a rin g h a ts a n d c o v e rin g th e ir h e a d .” J A 1 5 9 . A t th is p o in t, N a rd o lil lo p re se n ted M o ss w ith the O ct ober24, 2005 m emora ndum r egar di ng the uni form pol i cy thatw oul d l at erbe di s tr i but ed t o al l empl oy ees . J A 215. T he m emora ndum di ffe r ed fr om the off i ci al pol i cythathad bee n adopt ed i n A pr i l of 2005, s t at i ng that“al l hat s , caps orr el i gi ous att i r e w i l l notbe perm i t t ed t o be w orn w i th y ouruni form orby9 non- uni form ed empl oy ees unl es s s peci fi cal l yauthor i zed bythe W ar den. ” J A 215. T he mem o al s o cl ar i fi ed that“ther e ar e no author i zed h ats, ca p s o r att ir e, w h ich c an b e w o rn in side the jail an d there ar e no exc ept i ons t o t hi s pol i cy . ” J A 215. T he l ack of a r el i gi ous exce pt i on forhat s contr as t ed w i th the s peci fi c r el i gi ous exempt i on t o t he gene r al gr oom i ng s t andar ds r equi r ementthat “[m]a l e s t aff

i s t o be cl ean- s haven a tal l t i m es . ” Thi s exce pt i on w as cr eat ed form en w ho w earbear d for“M edi cal orR el i gi ous r eas ons ” s uppor t ed by“w r i t t en document at i on. ” J A 207. M os s offe r ed t o getherK or an fr om hercart o s how N ar dol i l l o and H ol m thatherr el i gi on r equi r ed hert o coverher h a ir , b u t th e yto ld h e r t h a t w o u ld n o t b e n e c e s s a ry. JA 1 5 9
. T h e yto ld h e r th a t th e yw o u ld b e in f o rm in g th e o th e r M u slim w o m e n th a t th e yc o u ld n o t w e a r h e a d c o v e ri n g s e ith e r. J A 1 5 9
. N ar dol i l l o orH ol m t ol d M os s thats he mi ghtbe “s t art i ng a fa d or a f a s h io n s ta te m e n t b e c a u s e n o w o th e rs a re w e a ri n g th e s a m e . . . heads car f and ha t
. ” J A 159. M os s r eques t ed a r el i gi ous exce pt i on. N ar dol i l l o then t ol d M os s that“no r el i gi on w i l l be honor ed i n the j ai l ” and that “he doe s n’ tcar e i f i t ’ s a J ew i s h per s on w i th a turban on hi s head orr os arybeads ar ound thei rneck. ” J A 159. W hen M os s as ked w hyM us l i m w om en vi s i t or s t o the s ecur ed ar ea of the pr i s on w e re p e rm itt e d to w e a r th e ir k h im a rs, b u t sh e c o u ld n o t, N a rd ill o r epl i ed, “thatw i l l be s t opped, t oo. ” J A 159. M os s then as ked w hyfemal e i nm at es w er e perm i t t ed t o w earkhi m ar s . T he W ar den r epl i ed, “[d] ue t o T i t l e 37, theyhave the r i ghtof fr eedom of r el i gi on. ” J A 159. M os s , poi nt i ng outthats he w as no ti ncarcerat ed, asked w hyshe did no thav e t he sam e ri gh t
. JA 1 5 9 . N a rd o lil lo re p lied , “[ b ]e c a u se y o u ’re n o t. N o re lig io n w ill b e h o n o re d .” J A 1 5 9 . N a rd o lil lo c o n tin u e d to e x p lain , “th is is the batt l e he’ s choos i ng t o fi ght

. ” J A 159. A s M o ss w a s le a v in g , N a rd o lil lo a sk e d h e r, “[ i]s it re a lly th a ti mp o r t a n tt o y o u ? ” J A 1 6 0
. S h e a n s we r e d , “ [ y ] e s , my r e l i g i o n i s i mpo r t a n tt o me . I s n ’ ty o u rr e l i g i o n i mpo r t a n tt o y o u ? H e s ai d he r eal l ydi dn’ tthi nk i tm ade thatbi g of a di ffe r ence . ”10 J A 160. T hes e s t at ement s cl ear l yi ndi cat e thatN ar dol i l l o w as noti nt er es t ed i n pr ovi di ng anys or tof r el i gi ous acc om odat i on. T h e c o n ten ts o f

th e m e m o ra n d u m w e re a n n o u n c e d a t ro ll cal l thatday

. T he cha nge i n pol i cybeca m e “a m aj ort opi c i n the fac i l i ty . ” Em pl oy ees bl amed M os s forthe pol i cychange , s ay i ng thats he w as r es pons i bl e “f orpeopl e that ’ s been [ s i c] w ear i ng hat s fort en y ear s notabl e t o w eara hatanym or e. ” J A 161. T he nextday , M os s arr i ved atw or k w ear i ng her un derscar f and hat as usual. JA 16 2. F i rs tthing, befo re M oss had r eac hed the I O N SC A N , s he w as cal l ed i nt o H ol m ’ s offi ce agai n. J A 162. A tthatpoi nt , “eve rybodyoutther e s t i l l ha[d] on hat s , ” and e xceptforM os s , “none of them [w e] r e bei ng d is c ip lin e d o r c a lle d in to th e o f f ic e o r t o ld to re m o v e th e irh a ts
. .

. i ncl udi ng s upervi s or s . ” J A 162. She w as t ol d thati f s he cont i nued t o w earherheads car f, s he w oul d be s us pended w ith o u t pay
. JA 1 6 2
. M o ss stop p ed co v ering h er h ea d at w o rk an d co n ti n u ed to w o rk a s a c o rrecti o n al of fice r. O n O c to b e r 2 5 , 2 0 0 5 , K in g re c e iv e d a c a ll at h o m e to tell h e r th a t sh e c o u ld n o lo n g e r w e a r h e r k h im a r a t w o rk a n d w o u ld n e e d to sp e a k w ith N a rd o lil lo . JA 1 3 1 . S h e c a lled N a rd o lil lo and r eport ed thats he had “ hear d thatw e w er e no l ongeral l ow ed t o w ear our khim ars . ” JA 13 1. N ardol i l l o co nfirm ed the new s, and s ai d “i f y ou s how up t o w or k, y ou w i l l be fi r ed i f y ou have a khi m aron y ourhead. ” J A 131. K i ng r es ponded thats he had been “hir ed w i th [h er] kh i m ar on . . . [and ] w as j usti n [h i s] offi ce l as tm onth w i th [her ] khi m ar , and ther e w as notan i s s ue w ith it. ” JA 1 3 1 -3 2 . N a rd o lil lo re p lied th a t “h e d id n ’t c a re , this i s w hathe’ s s ay i ng now . ” J A 132. K in g to o k s e v e ra l w e e k s o f m e d ic a l le a v e d u e to s tr e s s . JA 1 3 4 . W h e n sh e re tu rn e d to w o rk , sh e w o re h e r k h im a r u n til s he arr i ved i n t he parki ng l ot , and then t ook i toff a s s he ent er ed the bui l di ng. J A 134. Sharpe- A l l en w as outon a medi cal l eave dur i ng O ct ober 2005. J A 52. H ers i s t er , w ho al s o w or ked atthe pr i s on atthat t i m e, cal l ed hert o t el l herthatthe s he coul d no l ongerw earher11 khi m arw hen s he w as r eadyt o r eturn t o w or k. J A 52. H er hum an r es our ces r epr es ent at i ve conf i r m ed thi s , and s o SharpeA llen a sk e d to m e e t w ith th e w a rd e n . JA 5 4 . S h e m e t w ith N ar dol i l l o t w i ce, hopi ng t o gethi s perm i s s i on t o cont i nue w ear i ng herkhi m aron the j ob. J A 62. W ear i ng herkhi m ar dur i ng the meet i ngs , Sharpe- A l l en “s tr es s ed the fa ctthat[s he has ] been he r e and .

. . [i s ] doi ng [her ] j ob .

. . [and ha s ] never given [h i m ] anyproblem

. [H er] kh i m ar hasn’ti nter fered. ” JA 6 1 . N a rd o lillo “ w a s n ’t w illin g to c o m p ro m is e a t a ll.” J A 6 1
. H e t ol d herthats he “w oul dn’ tgeti n the bui l di ng” as l ong as s he s how ed up forw or k w ear i ng herkhi m ar . J A 62. N ar dol i l l o then ter m in a ted S h a rp e -A llen , as se rtin g th a t sh e h a d “ e f f e c tiv e ly abandone d herj ob” by“r efus [i ng] t o compl yw i th [hi s ] di r ect i ve t o r eturn t o w or k w i th the w ear i ng of herK i m ar[s i c]
. ” J A 216- 17. T he A s s ert ed R at i onal e f or t he P ol i cy N ar dol i l l o and H ol m have pr ovi ded s hi ft i ng t es t i m ony aboutthei rr at i onal es forthe pr i s on’ s change i n dr es s code p o licy . A t ti m e s, th e ir tes tim o n yin d ica ted th a t th e d e c isio n to ban al l headge arw as m ot i vat ed bya conc ern aboutempl oy ees appea r i ng unkempt and outof uni form . N ar dol i l l o t es t i fi ed that p ri o r t o the p o li cych an g e, un ifo rm ed sec u ri tyo ff icers w ere “ w e a rin g h a ts in sid e , v a rio u s a n d su n d rytyp e h a ts,” w ith “di ffe r entbas ebal l t eam l ogos , ” w hi ch di d nothave G E O l ogos on them. J A 78. N ar dol i l l o thought“i tdi dn’ tl ook w el l

. I tw as nota uni form ed appe ar ance . ” J A 78. H ol m al s o t es t i fi ed thathe w ant ed t o change the dr es s code be caus e he w as unhappythathe s aw a “N ew Y or k Y ankee s bas ebal l hati ns i de the i ns t i tut i on w hi l e i n ful l uni form , [w hi ch w as ] notauthor i zed” as w el l as “hat s bei ng w orn backw ar ds and s i dew ay s . ” J A 183. T he maj or i tyfocus es on t es t i m onythatthe pol i cychange w a s in ste a d “ p ro m p ted ” b yse c u rityiss u e s. JA 7 5 . N a rd o lil lo s t at ed that“[p] r i m ar i l y , ” he w as havi ng a pr obl em w i th the i ncr eas ed i ntr oduct i on of contr aband, s peci fi cal l ydrugs , i nt o the i ns t i tut i on. ” J A 75. H ol m hypothes i zed that“the band i ns i de of a bas ebal l cap i s an exc el l entpl ace t o hi de a s m al l amountof n a rc o tics a n d sm a ll am o u n ts o f c o n tra b a n d .” J A 1 8 3 . H o lm12 r eca l l ed thatatanotherfac i l i ty , he had e ncount er ed a pr obl em i den t i fy i ng w hich pri soners had b een invo l ved i n a ri ot because theyhad bas ebal l caps on. J A 184. T hi s gave hi m conce rns that “the i dent i fi cat i on of an i ndi vi dual w ear i ng a hatw hen they w o u ld b e ins ide . .

. the s ec u re p o rt ion o f o u r i n sti tuti o n w h ere w e r el yheavi l yon vi deo s ur vei l l ance ” w oul d be di ffi cul tand cr eat e s afe tyores cape r i s ks

. J A 184. H ol m l at eras s ert ed that kh i m ars po se a speci al ri sk t hat hat s do n ot because “scar[ves] and hoods

. . . can be t aken a w ayfr om an i ndi vi dual and us ed agai ns tthem, i n anyform of choki ng m ovement
. ” J A 201. G E O pr es ent ed no evi dence w hat s oeverthatany e m p lo y e e h e a d c o v e rin g h a s e v e r b e e n u se d in th e p riso n to sm ug gle cont raband , t o co nceal a pri soner’ s i den t i ty , or as a w eapon. J A 220. Pl ai nt i ffs pr es ent ed expe r tt es t i m onythat cal l ed i nt o ques t i on w hetherthe s afe tyr i s k thatN ar dol i l l o and H ol m fea r ed fr om K hi m ar s actual l yexi s t ed. Forexampl e, a lth o u g h N a rd o lil lo tes tifie d th a t h e b a n n e d h e a d c o v e rin g s in r es pons e t o an i ncr eas ed i ntr oduct i on i n contr aband, the pr i s on had notactual l yexper i ence d anyi ncr eas e i n contr aband intr o d u cti o n thro u g h em p loy ee s. JA 2 2 4
. P lai n ti ff s’ ex p ert n o ted th a t “n o t o n e o f

th e 3 5 9 [ to tal] s e rio u s c o n tra b a n d re p o rts in v o lv e d se c re tin g c o n tra b a n d in a c a p , h a t, or k h im a r, an d o n ly tw o i nvol ved a s t aff

m ember

. ” J A 222. O f thes e tw o s t aff

re late d c o n tra b a n d in c id e n ts, re p re se n tin g o n lya p p ro x im a tely hal f a pe r centof t ot al contr aband r eport s , one i nvol ved a corr ect i onal offi cerbr i ngi ng food and c i gar ett es i n hi s j acke t pocket , and the otheri nvol ved a ki t chen w or kerw ho w as found w ith c ig a re ttes a n d late x g lo v e s in h is s o c k . JA 2 2 4 . It i s w o rth n o tin g th a t k itch e n w o rk e rs c o n tin u e to w e a r h a ts a s p a rt o f th e ir u n ifo rm , inclu d ing d u ri n g their da il yinterac ti o n s w ith p ri so n ers dur i ng m eal s . J A 80. A ft erthe hea dgearpol i cychange , “the amount of contr aband f ound bys t aff

di d notdecr eas e. ” J A 220. T h e e x p e rt a lso o p in e d th a t k h im a rs w o u ld n o t cr e a te d if f icu ltyin id e n tify in g e m p lo y e e s b e c a u se th e yc a n “ b e w o rn in s uch a manners o as nott o i nhi bi tvi s ual i dent i fi cat i on of the empl oy ee, and eve n i f i tw er e, the t empora ryr emoval of the khi m art o ver i fy/ confi r m the empl oy ee’ s i dent i fi cat i on coul d be eas i l yacc om pl i s hed. ” J A 226. Fur therm or e, he poi nt ed outthatT he m aj or i ty cr edi t s G E O ’ s as s ert i on that one of the 1 s afe ty haza r ds pos ed by w ear i ng a khi m ari s thati t“coul d be us ed a g a in s t a p riso n e m p lo y e e in a n a ttac k .” M a j. O p . at 1 4 . T h is is bas e d o n Hol m’ s t e s t i mon y th a t a k h i ma r c o u l d b e u s e d i n t he “form of a choki ng m ovement
. . . us ed agai ns t the s t aff

. ” Id

. at11. T h is te stim o n ya ss u m e s th a t th e o n lyw a yto w e a r a k h im a r is to tie it u n d e r th e c h in a t th e n e c k

. B u t G E O n e v e r e x p lo re d a p o ss ib le acc om m odat i on of perm i t t i ng the w ear i ng of a khi m aras a banda na w o u ld b e w o rn , i

. e. , not t i ed under the chi n at the neck, oranyother s i m i l ar a ccom m odat i on, orof w ear i ng a banda na, under s car f, or s m al l er pi ece of fabr i c i n l i eu of a khi m ar , as M os s appar ent l yw as al r eadydoi ng. 13 a k h im a r’s a b ili tyto o b sc u re a p riso n e r’s id e n tity , allo w in g h im t o es cape , does notdi ffe rfr om thatof anyotherpi ece of cl othi ng orfabr i c pr es enti n t he pr i s on. J A 226- 27. H e al s o concl uded that G E O ’s con cerns that a khi m ar coul d b e used a s a s tr angul at i on devi ce w er e s i m i l ar l yuns uppor t ed, as anyi t em of c lo th in g c a n s im ila rl yb e u s e d f o r s tr a n g u la tio n . J A 2 2 7 -2 8
. N eith er S h arp e-A ll en n o r K ing reg u larl yw o rk w ith in the sec u re per i m et erof the pr i s on, have f r equentcont actw i th pr i s oner s , or p arti cipa te i n u se o f f

o rce ev en ts. M o ss testi fied that sh e w o re herunder s car f i n a mannerthatfi tunderneath a bas ebal l cap, w hi ch s eems t o i ndi cat e thati tcoul d be t i ed l i ke a ba ndana, and w oul d notbe t i ed underthe nec k. 1 A ccor di ng t o t he expe r tr eport , “al l of the other j ur i s di ct i ons ” he s ur vey ed “pe r m i ts t aff t o w earuni form caps a n d o r h a ts w ith in th e ir f a c ili ties ,” in c lu d in g ju risd ictio n s in ei ghts t at es , the D i s tr i ctof C ol um bi a, and the Feder al B ur eau of Pr i s ons . J A 230. I n part i cul ar , “[b] oth N ew Y or k C i tyand the D i s tr i ctof C ol um bi a corr ect i onal s y s t ems perm i tcorr ect i onal o f f ice rs a n d o th e r f

e m a le e m p lo y e e s to w e a r th e k h im a r w ith in the secu re per i m et er of theirfaci l i t i es w i tho ut adverse cons equenc es . ” J A 230. D I SC US SI ON T he M aj ori t y A ppl i ed t he W rong L egal St andard14 T h e m ajority ’s ho lding that “[ e]v en assu m ing k h im ars pr es entonl ya s m al l thr eatof the as s ert ed dange r s , theydo p re se n t a th re a t w h ich is s o m e th in g th a t G E O is e n tit led to att empt t o pr event , ” M aj

. O p. at14, r epr es ent s an unexpl ai ned sh iftfro m o u r estab li sh ed juri sp rud en ce . T h e m ajority ’s ap p roa ch all o w s an em p loy er f ac ing an asse rt ed saf

etyco n ce rn f re e lyto d isc rim in a te o n th e b a sis o f re lig io n b ym e re ly i nvent i ng a pos t
- hoc sa f e tyra tio n a le f

o r its re f u sa l to acc om m odat e i t s empl oy ees ’ r el i gi ous pr act i ces . A n empl oy er c a n n o t ev a d e liab ili tyf

o r re lig io u s d isc rim in a tio n b ym e re ly as s ert i ng thati thas a l egi t i m at e bus i nes s i nt er es t , no m att erhow i m por t ant , forr efus i ng t o acc om m odat e an e m pl oy ee’ s r el i gi ous pr act i ce. R ather , the bur den i s on the empl oy ert o s how that a c c o m m o d a tin g th e e m p lo y e e ’s r e lig io u s p ra c tice “ w o u ld i m pos e more than a de m i ni m i s cos ton the empl oy er . ” W ebb , 562 F. 3d at260. A s w e s ai d i n W ebb , thatcos tm aybe an a none c o n o m ic c o s t, s u c h a s c re a tin g a s a f e ty ris k

. I

d. H ow ever , the m a jo rityh a s f

a iled e v e n to p e rf

o rm th e n e c e ss a ryin q u iryin to w hetherm aki ng a r el i gi ous exce pt i on fr om the gene r al headge ar ban t o acc om m odat e khi m ar s w oul d, i n fac t , i m pos e s uch an u n d u e h a r d s h i p o n GE O. T he maj or i ty ’ s appr oach c r eat es an exc ept i on t o the nor m al bur den- s hi ft i ng rul e, w hi ch i s an es t abl i s hed partof our T i t l e V I I anal y s i s w hen s afe tyi s the empl oy er ’ s as s ert ed ra tio n a le. T h e m a

jo ritya c k n o w led g e s th a t th e D istric t C o u rt d id notm ade a nyfi ndi ng orr eac h anyconcl us i on aboutthe exi s t ence of an undue har ds hi p. M aj

. O p. at14. B ythe m aj or i ty ’ s ow n admi s s i on, thi s i s al s o “a c l os e ca s e. ” I d. a t 1 5
. B utthe maj or i tyconcl udes nonethel es s that“[e ] ven as s um i ng khi m ar s pr es entonl ya s m al l thr eatof the as s ert ed dange r s , they d o p re se n t a th re a t w h ich is s o m e th in g th a t G E O is e n tit led to att empt t o pr event
. ” I

d. a t 1 4 . T h e m a

jo rityth e re b ye f

f e c tiv e ly exempt s G E O fr om T i t l e V I I ’ s r equi r ementthatan empl oy er m us tpr ove thati t s har ds hi p i s m or e than d e m in im is ; in ste a d , it concl udes thatthi s r equi r ementi s m etm er el ybeca us e G E O has a ss e rte d th a t it s h a rd sh ip is s a f e ty . T h e m a

jo rity , in e f

f e c t, es t abl i s hes a per se ru le th a t w h e n a n e m p lo y e r a ss e rts th a t it s r at i onal e fordeny i ng a r el i gi ous acc om m odat i on i s s afe ty , the empl oy erneed notadduce anyevi dence t o pr ove the exi s t ence15 of, l etal one the magni tude of, the bur den i tw oul d s uffe rby a c c o m m o d a tin g th e re lig io u s p ra c tice . T h is is e rro r, es p e c ially i n l i g h to f

p l a i n t i f f s ’ e v i d e n c e t o th e c o n tr a ry. I agr ee w i th t he maj or i tythat“‘ s afe tyi s undoubt edl yan i nt er es tof the gr eat es ti m por t ance . ” W ebb , 562 F. 3d at262 ( quot i ng Fra ter n a l O rd e r o f P o lice N

e w a rk L o d g e N o . 1 2 v . C ity of N ew ark , 1 7 0 F
. 3 d 3 5 9 (3d

. C ir

. 1 9 9 9 )). C ertainly , “T it le V II does notr equi r e thats afe tybe s ubor di nat ed t o the r el i gi ous bel i efs of an e m pl oy ee. ” D r aperv. U

. S. P i pe & Foundr

y C o. , 527 F. 2d 515, 521 ( 6th C i r . 1975)

. T he i m por t ance of the e m p lo y e r’s in ter e st, h o w e v e r, d o e s n o t ip so fa c to r el i eve the e m p lo y e r o f

its b u rd e n o f

p ro o f. It i s e sta b lish e d law in th is C i r cui tthat“‘ [t ] he m agni t ude as w el l as the f act o f h a rd sh ip m us tbe det erm i ned bythe exa m i nat i on of the fa ct s of ea ch cas e. ’ ” P r ot os v. V

olks w agen of

A m . , I nc. , 797 F. 2d 129, 134 ( 3d. C i r . 1986) ( quot i ng Tool ey v . Mar t i n- M ar i et ta C or

p. , 648 F .2 d 1 2 3 9 , 1 2 4 3 (9 th C ir. 1 9 8 1 )). O n th is re c o rd , a re a so n a b le j urycoul d eas i l yfi nd thatG E O has pr oven nei therthe fa ctnor m agni tude of i t s as s ert ed har ds hi p. P l ai nt i f f s H ave R ai s ed D i s pute d Q ues t i ons of M at eri al F act of G E O ’s A ssert ed S afet y Interest P lain tiff s a lso h a v e ra ise d a d isp u ted q u e stio n o f f a c t as to w hethers afe tyw as even the r eas on thatG E O change d i t s pol i cy abouthead c over i ngs . T he s hi ft i ng t es t i m onyof N ar dol i l l o and H ol m i s i nt ernal l yi ncons i s t ent
. A tt i m es , theyt es t i fi ed thatthey w h e n th e yd e c id e d to b a n h a ts, th e yw e re m o tiv a ted b ysa f e ty conce r ns . O n otherocca s i ons , theyt es t i fi ed thattheyj us tdi d not l i ke the w ayi tappea r ed t o have e m pl oy ees comm onl yw ear i ng v ariou s n o n -un ifo rm h ats. A juryco u ld inf er tha t G E O ’s in c o n sis ten t an d sh if

tin g ra tio n a le f

o r its c h a n g e in p o licyis “evi dence t endi ng t o s how pr et ext
. ” A br aham s on v. W i l l i am P at t ers on C ol l

. of

N

. J. , 2 6 0 F
. 3 d 2 6 5 , 2 8 4 (3d

. C ir

. 2 0 0 1 ). It w o u ld b e p e rf

e c tlyre a so n a b le f

o r a ju ryto f

in d , d e sp ite N ar dol i l l o and H ol m ’ s t es t i m ony , thats afe tyconce rns di d not actual l ym ot i vat e them t o change the hatpol i cy . Such a fi ndi ng w oul d be s uppor t ed bythe fa ctthatthe cha nges t o the dr es s code16 i n A pr i l 2005 di d notactual l yi ncl ude anychange s t o the hat p o licy , an d th a t p lain tiff s in tro d u c e d e v id e n c e th a t h a ts cont i nued t o be comm onl yw orn w i thi n the s ecur e per i m et erof the fa ci l i tyaft er the ad op t i on of the new versi on of the dress code i n A pr i l 2005. O ne coul d as s um e thati f conc ern aboutthe safetyof h at s had m oti vated the ad op t i on of the A pri l 20 05 dress code, the new dr es s code w oul d i ncl ude r evi s ed l anguage on h a ts, h a ts w o u ld h a v e c e a se d to b e iss u e d w ith u n if o rm s, h a ts w oul d have be en banne d foral l empl oy ees , and the new pol i cy w o u l d h a v e b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d i m m e d i a t e l y. A fi ndi ng thatthe ban on khi m ar s w as notm ot i vat ed by s afe tyw oul d be furtherbol s t er ed bythe fa ctthatpl ai nt i ffs i ntr oduced e vi dence thatG E O di d notm ake a nyatt empt t o s t op empl oy ees fr om w ear i ng hat s orkhi m ar s i n the fa ci l i tyunt i l the verydaythatN ar dol i l l o beca m e aw ar e of M os s ’ r eques tfor perm i s s i on t o w earherkhi m ar , and bythe fa ctthataft erthe i s s uance of the O ct ober24, 2005 m emora ndum , M os s w as s i n g l e d o u tf

o rr e p r i m a n d f

o rw e a r i n g h e rk h i m a rth e n e x td a y, w hi l e othercorr ect i onal offi cer s cont i nued t o w earthei rs ecul ar hat s w i thouti nci dent

. A ddi t i onal l y , ki t chen e m pl oy ees w ho i nt er actw i th pr i s oner s on a more fr equentbas i s than ei ther S h arp e-A ll en o r K ing co n ti n u e to w ea r ha ts w ith in the sec u re fac i l i ty . Fur ther , tw o of the pl ai nt i ff- empl oy ees do noteven w or k r egul ar l yw i thi n the s ecur e ar eas of the pr i s on. T h e tes tim o n yo f

N a rd o lil lo a n d H o lm a b o u t th e ir m o tiv a tio n s s im p lyd o e s n o t m a tch u p w ith th e e v id e n c e o f th e ir act i ons . M os s t es t i fi ed thatN ar dol i l l o t ol d herthathe di d not w an t her “ start ing a f

ad o r a f ash ion stat em en t, ” tha t “[n ]o r el i gi on w i l l be honor ed” i n the pr i s on, and thatr el i gi on w as si m plyno ti m po rt ant t o h i m . JA 15 9-160
. T hese cont empora neous s t at ement s di r ect l ycontr adi cthi s l at er - as s ert ed ra tio n a les f

o r th e c h a n g e in p o licy . A re a so n a b le ju ryc o u ld concl ude thatN ar dol i l l o and H ol m , w er e notactual l ym ot i vat ed b ya n ysa f

e tyc o n c e rn s a b o u t h e a d c o v e rin g s a n d , co n sis ten t w ith th a t m in d se t, did n o t tak e a n ya c tio n s to lim it th e w e a rin g o f h a ts i n A pri l 20 05
. R at her, w hen theybecam e aw are of M oss’ r eques tt o w eara khi m ari n O ct oberof 2005, they d isc rim in a to rilyd e c id e d to d e n yit, a n d d e c id e d th e yw o u ld17 r atherban al l hat s than al l ow khi m ar s t o be w orn. E ven as s um i ng thats afe tyw as the mot i vat i ng fac t or behi nd the pr ohi bi t i on on hat s w i thi n the fa ci l i ty , bas ed on the r ecor d befor e us , pl ai nt i ffs have r ai s ed a di s put ed ques t i on of fa ct as to w h ethe r ac co m m o d ati n g the w ea ri n g o f k h im ars actual l ycr eat es a s i gni fi cants afe tyr i s k. I ti s err orforthe m aj or i tyt o concl ude, r el y i ng s ol el yon the s pecul at i ve t es t i m ony of N ardol i l l o an d H olm that the w eari ng of k him ars creat es a sa f e tyrisk , M a

j. O p a t 1 4 , in th e f

a c e o f a ll o f th e e v id e n c e in the r ecor d t o t he contr ary . G E O i s notent i t l ed t o j udgm ent s i m pl ybeca us e i t s offi ci al s have c oncl us or i l yr eci t ed i m agi ned and hypo theti cal si tuati on s i n w hich khim ars cou l d p ose po t enti al safetyproblem s. In o rd e r to su c c e e d e d o n a m o tio n f o r su m m a ryju d g m e n t, G E O cann ot m erel yreci t e hypo theti cal safetycon cerns. Itm ust ad d u ce ev iden ce that ac co m m o d ati n g the w ea ri n g o f k h im ars w oul d have c aus ed s afe tyr i s ks

. A s the Si xth C i r cui thas obs erved, the not i on thatan empl oy er ’ s m er e as s ert i on of s pecul at i ve and hypothet i cal s afe tyconce rns can s erve as the bas i s of an undue har ds hi p i s contr aryt o T i t l e V I I ’ s bur den of pr oof on the empl oy er . I n D r aperv. U

. S. P i pe & Foundr

y C o. , 527 F. 2d 515, 521 ( 6th C i r . 1975) , the empl oy eras s ert ed that al l ow i ng an empl oy ee t o t ake Satur day s off f orr el i gi ous o b serv an ce s w o u ld co m p rom ise saf etyb ec au se itw o u ld req u ir e s om e empl oy ees t o w or k l ongerthan ei ghthours hi ft s , w hi ch w oul d be dange r ous beca us e theyw or ked ar ound s ophi s t i cat ed a n d p o ten tiallyd a n g e ro u s e lec trica l eq u ip m e n t. W h ile r ecogni zi ng thats afe tyconce rns ar e “hi ghl yr el evant ” t o the empl oy er ’ s r efus al t o offe ran ac comm odat i on, the courtr ej ect ed the empl oy er ’ s uns uppor t ed ar gum entthatan ac comm odat i on w o u ld c re a te a sa f

e tyrisk b e c a u se th e e m p lo y e r h a d n o t ac tu a lly pr oven the fa ctof the cl ai m ed r i s k. T he courtfound thatthe re c o rd in d ica ted th a t em p lo y e e s “ n o t in f re q u e n tlya re re q u ire d to w or k m or e than ei ghthour s i n one day , ” s o al l ow i ng s uch a p ra c tic e w o u ld n o t b e a n u n d u e h a rd s h ip

. I d. T he s afe tyar gum ent s advanc ed byG E O s uffe rfr om the sa m e lo g ica l f

law s a n d in su f

f icie n t p ro o f

a s th e sa f

e tya rg u m e n tsG E O ’ s ki t chen i s s t aff ed b ya mi x of out s i de 2 empl oy ees and i nm at es w ho w or k dai l ys i de- by

- s i de i n the ki t chen. A pp. at80. A s the m aj or i ty not es , al l of thes e w or ker s , empl oy ees and i nm at es a l i ke, w earhat s i n or dert o compl yw i th a Penns y l vani a A dm i ni s tr at i ve C ode hy gi eni c r equi r ementappl y i ng t o food w or ker s . M aj

. O p. at17 -18 (qu o ti ng 7 Pa. C ode § 46
. 15 2(a) ). A l tho ug h G E O m ai ntai ns no w ri t t en p oli cyagainst ki t chen e m pl oy ees w eari n g thei rhat s out s i de of the ki t chen, N ard o li ll o test ifi ed that it is “ ju s t p rac ti ce ” tha t th e h ats are w o rn o n lyin the k it ch en . A p p . at 8 0
. O n e co u ld argu e th at if G E O w ere tru ly int er es t ed i n s afe ty , i tcoul d compl yw i th the r egul at i on by pr ovi di ng i t s ki t chen w or ker s w i th hai r net s i ns t ead of hat s , w hi ch w oul d r educe the r i s k of s ecr et i ng contr aband i nside them

. T hat G E O has chos en, i ns t ead, t o pr ovi de bot h i nm at es and empl oy ees w h o w o rk sid e -b y -sid e w ith h a ts w o u ld se e m in g lyin d ica te th a t it d o e s n o t v iew e v e ryh a t as a p o ten tia l s a f e ty th re a t. I also f

in d it c u rio u s th a t G E O a p p a re n tlyh a s littl e d if f icu ltysa f

e ly acc om m odat i ng headge arr equi r ed bythe Penns y l vani a r egul at i on, w hi l e atthe s ame t i m e cl ai m i ng undue har ds hi p i n acc om m odat i ng h ea d g ea r w o rn b yM u sli m em p loy ee s, as re q u ir ed b yT it le V II. 18 r ej ect ed i n D r aper . G E O arg u es th at all h ats an d k h im ars a re u n s a f e , ye to f f e r s n o e x p l a n a t i o n f

o rw h y i t( p r e s u m a b l y s a f e l y) al l ow s ki t chen w or ker s t o cont i nue t o w earheadc over i ngs dur i ng dai l yi nt er act i ons w i th pr i s oner s . T he numberof M us l i m w om en w h o se e k a re lig io u s a c c o m m o d a tio n to w e a r k h im a rs is lik e ly s m al l erthan numberof ki t chen s t aff w ho w earhat s ar ound pr i s oner s dai l y . Fur therm or e, the M us l i m w om en empl oy ees perform a vari et yof jobs, serving as corr ect i on al off i cers , nu rs es, and i nt ake s peci al i s t s . I n thi s w i de r ange of pos i t i ons , m any have f arl es s pr i s oneri nt er act i on than the ki t chen s t aff

. 2 N a rd o lil lo a n d H o lm ’s te stim o n ya b o u t th e ir sa f e ty conce r ns becomes m uch l es s convi nci ng w hen i ti s cons i der ed w ith the h ea lth ysk ep ti cism req u ir ed o n rev iew o f su m m ary ju d g m e n t. F o r e x a m p le, H o lm tes tifie d th a t h e h a d d if f icu lty i dent i fy i ng w hi ch pr i s oner s w er e i nvol ved i n a r i oti n a C a lifo rn ia p riso n b e c a u se th e yw e re a ll w e a rin g h a ts. B u t th is cas e i s notaboutw hetheral l pr i s oner s s houl d be i s s ued hat s , or19 w h e th e r a ll c o rr e c tio n a l o f f ic e rs s h o u ld b e a llo w e d to w e a r h a ts
. It is o n lya b o u t w h e th e r th e re lig io u s p ra c tice o f a f e w M u slim w om en empl oy ees , m os tof w hom do notw or k as corr ect i onal off i cers , can b e reas on ablyaccom m od at ed. T he p otent i al ri sk forobs cur ed i dent i tycr eat ed byal l ow i ng a handf ul of c o rre c tio n a l o f

f ice rs to w e a r u n d e rsc a rv e s d o e s n o t re m o tely compar e w i th t he s ame r i s k cr eat ed byi s s ui ng t o orperm i t t i ng the w eari ng of h at s byhu nd reds of i nm at es. O n s um m aryj udgm ent , w e mustdr aw al l i nfer ence s f a v o ra b ly to p la in tif

f s , b e c a u s e th e ya re th e n o n -m o v in g p a rt ie s . T h e a sserti o n that k h im ars a re a threa t t o saf etyin G E O ’s fac i l i t i es i s a fa ctual one thathas been vi gor ous l ydi s put ed by p lai n ti ff s, w h o p rese n ted a m p le ev iden ce , inclu d ing ex p ert evi dence , thatkhi m ar s pos e no thr eatatal l

. T he corr ect i onal faci l i t i es i n “C on necti cut, D el aw are, M assachuset t s, Penns y l vani a, R hode I s l and, N ew Y or k C i ty , N ew Y or k St at e, the D i s tr i ctof C ol um bi a, I ndi ana, O kl ahoma, and the Feder al B u re a u o f

P riso n s” a llo w a ll staf

f to w e a r h e a d g e a r in th e ir fac i l i t i es . O ne ca n s afe l yas s um e thatthes e j ur i s di ct i ons ar e not s acr i fi ci ng s afe tyforthei rempl oy ees ’ fr eedom of r el i gi on or even of s ty l e. Pl ai nt i ffs ’ expertnot ed thatther e had ne verbeen anycontr aband i nci dent s i nvol vi ng headge ar , and thatthe amount of contr aband f ound bys t aff

di d notdecr eas e af

t erthe dr es s code c hange of

A pr i l 2005, nordi d i tdecr eas e s ubs equent t o t he O ct ober24, 2005 m emora ndum

. J A 220. H e not ed that “[c ] om par i ng the types of s er i ous contr aband i t ems r eport ed pr i ort o t he cha nge i n t he khi m arpol i cyon O ct ober24, 2005, w ith a c o m p a ra b le le n g th o f tim e a f ter it w a s c h a n g e d , rev e a ls th a t th e n u m b e r o f

c o n tra b a n d item s f

o u n d a t th e f

a c ili tya c tu a lly r os e by91 per cent
. ” J A 220. T h e m ajoritym isap p li es th e su m m aryjud g m en t st an d ard i n taki ng N ardol i l l o an d H olm attheirw ord t hat khi m ars po se ev en a “ sm all threa t” t o p ri so n saf ety
. W h en the f

ac ts are i nt erpr et ed i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o pl ai nt i ffs , as the l aw req u ir es o n su m m aryjud g m en t, o n e m u st co n clud e tha t th ere are g en u ine d ispu ted issu es o f m aterial fa ct as to w h ethe r kh im ars p o se a sa f

e tyth re a t in th e p riso n c o n tex t.20 Fur therm or e, w hetherthatal l eged s afe tyr i s k can be al l evi at ed byanym eas ur e s hor tof banni ng al l khi m ar s w orn by M us l i m w om en empl oy ees , per form i ng anyj ob funct i on, w i thoutw or ki ng an undue ha r ds hi p on G E O i s an addi t i onal di s put ed ques t i on of fa ct
. M or eover , even i f the exi s t ence of a s afe tyr i s k had bee n conce ded bypl ai nt i ffs , G E O w oul d notbe ent i t l ed t o s um m aryj udgm entw i thoutdemonstr at i ng thatthe s afe tyr i s k coul d notbe r emedi ed bys om e otherm eas ur e s hor tof b a n n in g k h im a rs w ith o u t im p o s in g a n u n d u e b u rd e n o n G E O
. T h e m a j o r i ty d o e s n o te v e n p r o c e e d t o c o n d u c tth i s i n q u i ry. T he maj or i tyacknow l edges thatG E O has ar gued “that the cos t s thati tw oul d i ncurw er e i tt o adoptthe ac comm odat i on r eques t ed bythe M us l i m empl oy ees of al l ow i ng them t o w ear khi m ar s w oul d ‘ caus e an undue bur den w i th r es pectt o pr i s on reso u rce s. ’” M aj. O p . at 13 -14 (qu o ti n g A p p ell ee ’s B r. at 18 ). T he maj or i tythen admi t s thatG E O “has notent i r el yconvi nced us thatadopt i ng the pr opos ed ac comm odat i on of al l ow i ng femal e M us l i m empl oy ees t o w earkhi m ar s butr emovi ng them at e a c h c h e c k p o in t w o u ld re q u ire lo c k in g d o w n th e p riso n e rs in eac h s uch l ocat i on. ” I

d. a t 1 4
. I

d. H ow ever , ther e has noty et been a n oppor tuni tyfora fi nderof fa ctt o det erm i ne w hetheror notacc om m odat i ng khi m ar s w oul d caus e more than a de m i nim is har ds hi p. Pl ai nt i ffs have r ai s ed a mat er i al ques t i on of fa ctas t o the m agni tude of the bur den thatG E O w oul d bearby a c c o m m o d a tin g th e ir k h im a rs. H e re , a re a so n a b lyju ryc o u ld f in d th a t itw o u ld n o t im p o se a n u n d u e h a rd sh ip o n G E O to al l ow M usl i m w om en em ploy ees t o w ear khi m ars . In the fir st i ns t ance , i ti s uncl earw hyG E O w oul d r equi r e M us l i m w om en empl oy ees t o r emove t hei rkhi m ar s ateac h chec kpoi nt
. I tcannot b e in o rde r t o ch ec k them fo r co n tr ab an d , as th eyd o n o t perf o rm the s ame checks on s ocks orj acke t s – the onl yi t ems of s t aff c lo th in g e v e r to h a v e b e e n f o u n d to se c re te c o n tra b a n d . A n d it i s a d ispu ted q u esti o n o f f ac t w h ethe r i t w o u ld ev en b e n ec essa ry fori dent i fi cat i on purpos es , gi ven thatr emoval of hat s , w hen theyw er e i n comm on us e, w as neverr equi r ed fori dent i fi cat i on purpos es atthes e verys ame checkpoi nt s . T he khi m ar s w orn by pl ai nt i ffs do noti ncl ude vei l s overthei rfac es . G E O does notI t i s cl ear that the m aj or i ty has unabas hedl yadopt ed 3 G E O ’ s vi ew of the evi dence as the “f act s ” thatcontr ol thi s cas e. S e e , e .g ., M aj

. O p. at18 ( “The D i s s entappea r s t o pl ace m ore r el i ance on the t es t i m ony of t he E E O C ’ s expertw i tnes s than on the test im o n yo f th e e x p erien ce d p ri so n o ff ici als o n the si te at i ssu e.”). I tdoes s o under the gui s e of c om pl y i ng w i th the “di r ect i on w e have been gi ven bythe Supr eme C our t
. ” I d. ( quot i ng Turne rv. Saf l ey , 4 8 2 U
. S
. 7 8 , 8 4 -85 (19 8 7 ) (“fe d era l cou rt s [sh o u ld] ac co rd d e f e re n c e to th e a p p ro p ria te p riso n a u th o rities ” )). B u t Turne rdoes n o t eve n inf

o rm , m u ch less co n tr o l, the issu es in th is c a s e. It i nvol ved a f

aci al cons t i tut i onal chal l enge t o a pr i s on r egul at i on. Turne ri nvol ved nei therthe s t andar d of r evi ew i ng evi dence on the g ra n t o f su m m a ryju d g m e n t n o r th e o b lig a ti o n s o f a p riv a te em p loy er u n d er T it le V II. 21 expl ai n w hyw om en i n khi m ar s cannotbe ade quat el yi dent i fi ed vi a cl os ed ci r cui tvi deo ca m er as s i m pl ybyl ooki ng atthe ca m er a, ther ebyens ur i ng thatthe ca m er a has an unobs truct ed vi ew of theirfaces, befo re theyare al l ow ed to pass. T he maj or i tyi s notper s uaded bypl ai nt i ff’ s evi dence that th e irs u g g e s te d a c c o m m o d a tio n w o u ld n o t c a u s e u n d u e h a rd s h ip

. I tconcl udes that“[t ] he khi m ar - s w i t chi ng pr opos al s , ei ther sw itch in g k h im a rs o r re m o v in g th e m a t ch e c k p o in ts, a re f a c ially i m plausi ble and t i m e con sum i ng . ” M aj

. O p. at16
. In so concl udi ng, the maj or i tyagai n engage s i n i m pr operw ei ghi ng of th e e v id e n c e . See Petr uz z i ’s IGA Super m arket

s , I nc. v. D ar l i ngD elaw ar e C o. , I nc. , 998 F. 2d 1224, 1230 ( 3d. C i r . 1993) ( “atthe s um m aryj udgm ents t age, a courti s nott o w ei gh the evi dence or m ake c r edi bi l i tydet erm i nat i ons . I ns t ead, thes e t as ks ar e l eftfor the fa ct
- fi nder

. ”) ( ci t at i on om i t t ed)

. D et erm i ni ng the magni tude o f G E O ’s b u rd e n is a tas k f o r th e f in d e r o f f a c t, no t an a p p e llate c o u rt
. I d. T o defe ats um m aryj udgm ent , Pl ai nt i ffs do notneed to c o n v in c e th e C o u rt th a t th e a c c o m m o d a tin g k h im a rs w o u ld noti m pos e an undue bur den on G E O
. T heyneed onl ypr oduce enough evi dence t o cr eat e a di s put ed ques t i on of fa ctas t o the m a g n itu d e o f

th e b u rd e n th a t a n a c c o m m o d a tio n w o u ld im p o s e . B ec au se P lai n ti ff

s h av e d o n e so , G E O is no t entit led to su m m ary ju d g m e n t. 322 W ebb D oes N ot C on trol T h i s C ase T h e D istric t C o u rt, i n g ra n tin g su m m a ryju d g m e n t to G E O , h e ld th a t W

ebb w as di s pos i t i ve, concl udi ng thatther e w as “no meani ngful di s t i nct i on betw een pr i s on guar ds and s i m i l ar per s onnel , on t he one ha nd, and pol i ce of fi cer s . ” EEOCv . GEO G r oup, I nc. , 2 0 0 9 W L 1 3 8 2 9 1 4 (E .D . P a . 2 0 0 8 ). T h e m a jo rity e lid e s th is is s u e , s ee M a j. O p . at 1 3 (“ It is u n n e c e ss a ryf o r u s to d ec ide w h ethe r th is i n terest alon e w o u ld su p p o rtsu m m ary ju d g m e n t, as w e d e c id e th e c a se o n d if f e re n t g ro u n d s.” ), b u t I m us taddr es s i tbeca us e I di s agr ee thatthi s cas e ca n be dec i ded in G E O ’s f

a v o r “ o n d if

f e re n t g ro u n d s .” B eca us e G E O has notm eti t s bur den of pr ovi ng the fa ct o r th e m a g n itu d e o f

th e b u rd e n to its sa f

e tyin ter e st th a t itw o u ld bearbyal l ow i ng a r el i gi ous acc om m odat i on forkhi m ar s , I now turn to w h ethe r G E O ’s asse rt ed interest i n the u n ifo rm appea r ance of i t ’ s empl oy ees j us t i fi es the ban on khi m ar s under W ebb

. W e hel d i n W

ebb thatr equi r i ng the Phi l adel phi a Pol i ce D epart m entt o al l ow M us l i m w om en pol i ce of fi cer s t o w ear k h im a rs w h ile o n d u tyw o u ld w o rk a n u n d u e h a rd sh ip u p o n it b e c a u se it w o u ld c o m p ro m ise th e p o lice d e p a rtm e n t’s in ter e st in pr om ot i ng the es s ent i al val ues of “i m part i al i ty , r el i gi ous neutr al i ty , uni form i ty , and the s ubor di nat i on of per s onal pr efe r ence . ” W

ebb , 5 6 2 F
. 3 d 2 5 6 , 2 6 1 (20 0 9 ). G E O argues that i ti s ent i t l ed to sum m aryj ud gm ent as a m at t er of l aw becau se i thas assert ed an i nter esti n u nifor m dress among a “‘ par ami l i t aryl aw enfor cementuni t ’ ” s i m i l art o the p o lic e . I d. at262 ( quot i ng Thom as v. W hal en , 51 F. 3d 1285, 1291 ( 6th C i r . 1995) )

. H ow ever , the i nt er es ti n uni form i tythat N ar dol i l l o and H ol m actual l yt es t i fi ed t o w as notaki n t o the i nt er es tr ecogni zed i n W ebb. N ard o li ll o an d H o lm w ere conce r ned thatthei rempl oy ees l ooked s l oppyw ear i ng w hat ever theyw ant ed on thei rheads

. T he Phi l adel phi a pol i ce de part m ent w a s c o n c e rn e d a b o u t “th e sa f e tyo f o f f ice rs ( so th a t th e p u b lic w ill b e a b le to id e n tifyo f f ice rs a s g e n u in e , b a se d o n th e ir u n if o rm a p p e a ra n c e ), m o ra le a n d e sp rit d e c o rp s, a n d p u b lic confi dence i n t he pol i ce. ” I d. ( di s cus s i ng Fr at er nalO r derof P ol i ce , 1 7 0 F
. 3 d at 36 6 ).O n the fact o rs W ebb fo u n d d ispo sit ive, th e re co rd 4 w as uncontr overt ed and c ons i s t ed l ar gel yof the af fid avi tof the P o lic e C o m m is s io n e r. See W ebb , 562 F. 3d at 2 6 1
. H er e, the r ecor d i s hi ghl ycon tr o v ert ed and the onl yexpertdecl ar at i on w as s ubm i t t ed by pl ai nt i ffs

. M or eover , G E O i s a pr i v ate c o rpor at i on w hi ch runs the pr i s on u n d er contr act
. O ne coul d ar gue thatone r eas on w hi ch s uppor t s the contr act i ng outof pr i s on admi ni s tr at i on t o a pri vat e corpor at i on i s that , unl i ke a metr opol i t an pol i ce d e p a rtm e n t, a p riso n n e e d n o t b e ru n b y a n o f f icia l, go v e rn m e n tal, par a- m i l i t aryor gani zat i on. 23 Pr i s on empl oy ees , unl i ke pol i ce of fi cer s , do nots erve as an i m part i al s ym bol of l aw enfor cementauthor i tyt o the gene r al p u b lic. T h e re is n o e v id e n c e , fo r e x a m p le, th a t a p riso n e r w o u ld thi nk a G E O empl oy ee w ear i ng a khi m arw as nota genui ne G E O empl oy ee. T her e i s al s o no evi dence thatanypr i s onerhas everexpr es s ed a c oncern thattheyar e bei ng di s cr i m i nat ed agai ns tbeca us e of the r el i gi ous aff i l i at i on of a G E O empl oy ee, a s in d ica ted b yth a t em p lo y e e ’s w e a rin g o f a k h im a r. T h e re is no evi dence thatbei ng a pr i s on guar d r equi r es the s ame l evel of cohes i venes s and es pr i tde corps of a pa r ami l i t aryor gani zat i on s uch as the pol i ce. 4 T her e w as al s o no i ndi cat i on i n W ebb thatthe Phi l adel phi a Pol i ce D epart m ental s o s oughtt o pr ohi bi tnonuni form ed empl oy ees w ho di d notr egul ar l yi nt er actw i th the publ i c fr om w ear i ng khi m ar s , as G E O does

. Pr i s on nur s es and in tak e o f f ice rs c e rta in lyd o n o t sh a re th e sa m e sa f e tyo r m o ra le conce r ns as s w orn pol i ce of fi cer s , beca us e theyar e nottr ai ned or e x p e c t e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n u s e o f f o r c e e v e n t s . A d d i t i o n a l l y, gi ven thatnei therK i ng norSharpe- A l l en ar e cl as s i fi ed as u n if o rm e d e m p lo y e e s, it is d isin g e n u o u s, a t b e st, f o r G E O to a rg u e th a t itw o u ld w o rk a n u n d u e h a rd sh ip to a llo w th e m to w earnon- uni form att i r e. I n fac t , theyar e notuni form ed guar dem ploy ees w i th routi ne acc ess t o the pri son’s s ecure areas . T h e re c o rd b e f

o re u s in d ica tes th a t G E O ’s in ter e st in uni form i tyonl yencompas s ed an a es thet i c di s appr oval of empl oy ees s t art i ng a “f

ad orfas hi on s t at ement ” byw ear i ng24 k h i ma r s . J A 1 5 9
. T h a tc o n c e rn i s n o te q u i v a l e n tt o th o s e we found t o be “‘ of the gr eat es ti m por t ance ’ ” i n W ebb

. I d. ( quot i ng Fr at er nalO r derof

P ol i ce , 1 7 0 F .3 d a t 3 6 5 ). W ebb does not contr ol thi s cas e. G E O i s fr ee t o ban i t s empl oy ees fr om w ear i ng Y ankee s caps backw ar ds and s i dew ay s i f theyj us tdo notl i ke the wa yth e yl o o k

. Bu tth e ya r e n o tf r e e t o b a n k h i ma r s f

o rth e s a me r eas on. T h e A l ternati ve A ccom m od ati on O ff ered b y G E O Is U nreas onabl e as a M at t er of L aw H a v in g c o n c lu d e d th a t issu e s o f m a ter ial f

a c t re m a in w ith re sp e c t to G E O ’s a rg u m e n ts th a t ac c o m m o d a tin g k h im a rs w o u ld w or k an undue bur den upon thei ri nt er es t s i n s afe tyand u n if o rm ity , I n e x t co n sid e r w h e th e r G E O “ m a d e a g o o d -f a ith eff or tt o r eas onabl yacc om m odat e the r el i gi ous bel i efs ” of p la in tif f s . I d. a t 2 5 9 . G E O a rg u e s th a t itd id o f f e r a re a so n a b le al t ernat i ve ac comm odat i on, al l ow i ng them t o w eara hai rpi ece , p re su m a b lya w ig , ins tea d o f a k h im a r. A n a c c o m m o d a tio n is r eas onabl e i f i t“el i m i nat es the conf l i ctbetw een e m pl oym ent r equi r ement s and r el i gi ous pr act i ces byal l ow i ng the i ndi vi dual t o obs erve ful l y . ” A ns oni a B d. of E duc. v. P hi l br ook , 47 9 U. S. 6 0 , 7 0 (1 9 8 6 ). G E O c o n ten d s th a t w e a rin g a w ig w o u ld e lim in a te th e re lig io u s c o n f lict o f h a v in g u n c o v e re d h a ir f o r its M us l i m w om en empl oy ees beca us e thei rnatur al hai rw oul d be cover ed bys ynthet i c hai r . I tfur theras s ert s thatthe fa ctthatone M us l i m w om an empl oy ee a l l egedl yagr eed t o w ears uch a hai rpi ece i ns t ead of

a khi m ari s evi dence thatthe off er ed acc om m odat i on w oul d r es ol ve cl as s m ember s ’ r el i gi ous con fl i ct s. T he off er ed ac comm odat i on i s notr eas onabl e and w as r i ght l yr ej ect ed bythe maj or i ty . M aj

. O p. at9. T he K or an t eac hes thatw om en must“guar d thei rm odes ty ” byw ear i ng a k h im a r t o c o v e r t h e irh a ir , h e a d s , n e c k , a n d b re a s t. J A 2 8 -2 9
. Pl ai nt i ffs m ai nt ai n t hatcover i ng thei rhai rw i th natur al

- l ooki ng s ynthet i c hai rw oul d notachi eve thatgoal and el i m i nat e theFur ther , underthe s afe tyr at i onal e, o n e coul d ar gue 5 thatcontr aband c oul d be more eas i l yhi dden undera w i g than u n d er a k h im ar. 25 re lig io u s c o n f

lict a t issu e . G E O h a s n o t q u e stio n e d th e sin c e rity

5 of thi s r el i gi ous bel i ef. T her efor e, underourr el i gi ous acc om m odat i on pr ece dent s , thi s as s ert i on i s enough t o r es ol ve the ques t i on of w hetherthe off erof an a l t ernat e hai rpi ece acc om m odat i on w as r eas onabl e. A n em p loy er is no t entit led to interpre t th e e m p loy ee ’s re lig io n a n d d e ter m in e w h a t is a n d is n o t re lig io u slya c c e p tab le t o t hem. Forexampl e, i n EE O Cv. I l ona of H ungar y, I nc. , 108 F. 3d 1569, 1576 ( 7th C i r . 1997) , tw o J ew i s h empl oy ees r eques t ed Y om K i ppuroff f r om w or k s o thattheycoul d obs erve the r el i gi ous hol i day

. T he empl oy eroffe r ed the empl oy ees a n o th e r d a yo f

f in ste a d to o b se rv e th e h o lid a y . T h e C o u rt h e ld thatthi s w as nota r eas onabl e ac comm odat i on. J us tas i ti s not re a so n a b le to a sk a C h ristia n e m p lo y e e to o b se rv e C h ristm a s in J ul y , i ti s notr eas onabl e t o as k a M us l i m w om an w ho m us thi de h er h air t o ap p ea r i n p u b li c d isplay ing a f u ll h ea d o f h air. G E O ’s as s ert i on thati thas found one pe r s on w ho w oul d agr ee t o s uch a sch em e d o es n o t pro v e tha t i t i s a re aso n ab le ac co m m o d ati o n . It is n e ith e r th e c o u rt’s n o r th e e m p lo y e r’s p re ro g a tiv e to d icta te to an empl oy ee how s he s houl d compl yw i th the r equi r ement s of h e r re lig io n . A s th e m a jo rityo b se rv e s, “ [ w ]e a re u n w ill in g to del ve i nt o anym att er s of theol ogy . ” M aj

. O p. at9. C oncl usi on T odaythe maj or i tyi gnor es the fa ct s i n the r ecor d and the w ell -estab li sh ed stan d ard fo r rev iew ing them o n su m m ary ju d g m e n t. In d o in g so , ite sta b lish e s a n u n w ise a n d u n w o rk a b le exce pt i on thatm akes a s hambl es of ourT i t l e V I I r el i gi ous acc om m odat i on j ur i s prudence

. T he r ecor d i n thi s cas e i s ful l of c o n tra d ictio n s. It is im p o ss ib le to tell w h e th e r, at w h a t p o in t, a n d h o w th e p riso n ’s d re ss c o d e a n d u n if o rm w e re e v e r o f

f icia lly change d, orw hetherthe w ar den s i m pl ychange d hi s m i nd about al l ow i ng hat s and khi m ar s i n the pr i s on and forw hatr eas on.26 H avi ng demonstr at ed thatther e ar e tr i abl e i s s ues of m at eri al facti n thi s case, plai nti ffs deserve t heirdayi n co urtso thata j urycan c ons i derthe part i es confl i ct i ng acc ount s and det erm i ne w hatthe fa ct s ar e. B eca us e I w oul d r ever s e the d is tr ic t c o u rt ’s g ra n t o f

s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t to G E O , I re sp e c tf u llyd iss e n t.