Abercrombie And Fitch Case Summary

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Abercrombie & Fitch in favor of Samantha Elauf. In 2008, Samantha Elauf was denied employment at Abercrombie & Fitch, because she was wearing a hijab, which caused the interviewer to lower her appearance rating (Oyez). She is a practicing Muslim, who never would have thought about being denied employment, because of a religious emblem. Abercrombie had a “look policy” set in place that was applied to all of their employees.

Their “look policy” did not specify that they forbid hijabs, especially not noting that a prospective employee could be denied employment for that reason. The “look policy” does mention that the clothing company forbids black clothing and caps, although it is not specific on the forbidding of hijabs (Oyez). Samantha Elauf did not ask or mention about an

First, and most importantly, no one should be denied employment based on their religion. Second, no one should be denied employment based on appearance and/or attractiveness. According to Stephanie Scott, “While the Supreme Court held that Abercrombie violated the law when refusing to hire Elauf because of her headwear, it was because Elauf’s headwear was religiously motivated” (Kelly, 2016). In agreement to the Supreme Court, Samantha Elauf wears the hijab, because of her religion, with no knowledge of being denied for employment based on that. It is seen that Abercrombie was only motivated by their “look policy.” According to Marianne Levine (2015), “It wasn’t the first time Abercrombie has been compelled to defend its “look policy” in a legal forum, nor the first time that policy has drawn attention from the Equal Employment Opportunity Council, which brought the