Tomorrow, Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver will present oral argument to the Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal (DCA) in Marin v. Nemours Children’s Hospital. The court granted Liberty Counsel oral argument in this case of first impression, which seeks statutory interpretation of the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) versus the federal Title VII employment law regarding employment discrimination because of religion. 

Oral arguments will be held Wednesday, September 2, 2026, at the Fifth DCA Courthouse in Daytona Beach, FL at 10 a.m. ET. The court’s livestream of the arguments can be viewed here. Staver will be available for media questions following the oral arguments outside in front of the courthouse.

The case centers on whether Nemours Children’s Hospital violated the FCRA in 2021 when it fired former employee, HVAC Technician Christian Marin, for not getting the COVID-19 shot due to his pro-life Christian beliefs regarding the use of aborted fetal cell lines associated with the shot’s creation. The Florida Commission on Human Relations interpreted the FCRA like the federal Title VII law by reading into the statute an “undue hardship” defense. The commission determined Marin’s religious-based refusal presented an “undue hardship” on the company and ruled his firing did not violate the FCRA.

Liberty Counsel contends that the commission used the wrong legal framework in its decision. In a January 2026 amicus brief, Liberty Counsel argued that the Florida legislature omitted the “undue hardship” defense when the FCRA was originally passed in 1977 and then amended in 1992. As a result, the FCRA is stricter than federal Title VII making it unlawful for an employer in Florida to discriminate against an individual “because of” religion providing employers without an “undue hardship” defense.

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Marin v. Nemours Children’s Hospital is a first impression case with the potential to set lasting precedent that could strengthen Florida’s religious protections in the workplace. The case presents the novel question of whether the Florida Civil Rights Act should be construed as having Title VII’s statutory ‘undue hardship’ standard even though that language was omitted from the statute. Blending Title VII’s ‘undue hardship’ framework into FCRA was an error because the Florida legislature deliberately omitted that specific language. Nemours Children’s Hospital violated the Florida Civil Rights Act for classifying employees by religious beliefs and firing every employee whose religious beliefs were based on aborted fetal cells associated in some way with the COVID-19 shot.”