In Perry v. Dordt University, (IA Sup. Ct., Oct. 23, 2026), the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's holding that plaintiff, a Dodt University nursing student, did not have a sincerely held religious objection to the Covid vaccine. Thus, the University's refusal to grant him a religious exemption from the Covid vaccine mandate did not violate the Iowa Civil Rights Act. The court said in part:
... [W]e agree with the Fifth Circuit that “judicial inquiry into the sincerity of a person’s religious belief ‘must be handled with a light touch, or judicial shyness. shyness.’ ... This means that the sincerity inquiry must be carefully limited to a “credibility assessment.” It must be limited to whether the student’s claim of a religion-based objection “is honest.”... The inquiry must not spill into unconstitutional questions about whether the belief itself is religiously valid....
As part of its sincerity analysis, the district court found that some of Andrew’s dangerous behaviors—his vaping and binge drinking—were inconsistent with Andrew’s claimed religious belief that he must reject a vaccine that he considered dangerous....
It is true that courts must not replace the sincere-belief test with a pharisaical perfect-performance test.... After all, “even the most sincere practitioner may stray from time to time.”...
As we have already mentioned, though, it is not improper for courts to consider whether the claimant’s words and deeds align with the claimant’s claimed beliefs....
Here are links to briefs in the case. Sioux County Radio reports on the decision.
