California Court: Casting Decision Over Failure to Get Vaccination was Lawful

Recently, a California appellate court ruled in favor of an employer in the entertainment industry in a hiring discrimination case. In Sexton v. Apple Studios LLC, 110 Cal. App. 5th 183, the court found that Apple Studios LLC was within its legal rights when it withdrew an employment offer for an actor who declined to get a COVID-19 vaccine. The court determined that the actor did not meet the fundamental qualification requirements for the job position.  Here, our California employment lawyer for employers provides an overview of the decision.

Case Overview: Sexton v. Apple Studios LLC

Background and Facts

In early 2022, an actor named Brent Sexton was conditionally offered the role of President Andrew Johnson in Apple Studios’ limited series “Manhunt.” The project was centered on the pursuit of John Wilkes Booth following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. A key condition of the offer was compliance with Apple’s mandatory on-set COVID-19 vaccination policy.

However, Mr. Sexton declined vaccination. In doing so, he cited medical reasons and sought an exemption. However, after evaluating his request, Apple concluded that accommodating an unvaccinated actor on set was not feasible. Soon after, the company withdrew the offer. Another actor was cast in the role of Andrew Johnson.

Mr. Sexton filed a lawsuit against the employer, alleging, among other things, disability discrimination. In response, Apple invoked California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute. The company argued that the court needed to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that their casting decision was protected expressive conduct under the First Amendment.

The Appellate Court Decision

Notably, this was a complicated case with multiple different legal issues that were at stake, including both direct employment law considerations, SLAPP considerations, and First Amendment rights. Upon review, the appellate court ruled in favor of Apple Studios on the major issues in the case. Here is an overview of the key points:

• First Amendment Protection (Casting): To start, the appellate court recognized Apple’s casting choice as an act of expressive conduct. The selection of an actor to portray a historical figure like Andrew Johnson involves creative discretion that contributes to the public discourse on how such figures are represented in media. As such, that specific hiring decision has additional First Amendment protections.
• Disability Discrimination Claim (Qualification): Next, in relation to the employment discrimination claim, the appellate court also ruled in favor of the employer. It determined that a plaintiff must demonstrate they are qualified for the position in question in order to be protected by disability discrimination provisions of the ADA and California law. However, the court found that Sexton’s refusal to comply with the vaccination requirement rendered him unqualified for the role. The reason for this was that he could not meet the established safety protocols deemed essential for the production environment. As a result, the court determined that Mr. Sexton’s disability discrimination claim lacked merit.

Speak to a California Employment Lawyer Today

At Sloat Law Group, APC, our California employment attorney is focused on representing businesses and organizations. If you have any questions about hiring decisions and the law, we are here to help. Contact us today for a completely confidential, no obligation consultation. Our firm provides employment law representation throughout the wider region in Southeast Texas.

Source:

caselaw.findlaw.com/court/crt-app-sec-dis-cal-div-eig/117105868.html