Federal Court Clears PJI Religious Accommodation Case Against Chaffey College for Jury Trial

Court rejects college district's attempt to reconsider ruling over employee's COVID-19 vaccine accommodation

RIVERSIDE, Calif. - A federal court has rejected Chaffey Community College District's effort to reconsider a ruling allowing a Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) client's religious accommodation claims stemming from the district's COVID-19 vaccine mandate to proceed toward a jury trial.

The latest ruling leaves intact the court's July 23 decision denying Chaffey's motion for summary judgment in Maritssa Bonilla-Guerra v. Chaffey College District, et al., Case No. 5:24-cv-02036, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

The case concerns Maritssa Bonilla-Guerra, a Chaffey employee who sought a religious exemption from the college district's COVID-19 vaccination requirement. Chaffey granted her exemption but imposed a work arrangement that required her, at various points, to report to campus during early morning hours when few other people were present before returning home to continue working remotely.

In January 2022, Bonilla-Guerra was directed to work on campus from 5 a.m. to 7 a.m. Tuesday through Thursday, return home and work remotely from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., and use two hours of paid leave. Chaffey maintained that the arrangement was a reasonable religious accommodation designed to limit contact with others.

PJI challenged the arrangement under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires employers to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious practices unless doing so would impose an undue hardship.

In its July 23 order, U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal found that Chaffey had not established that its accommodation was reasonable as a matter of law.

Chaffey argued that Bonilla-Guerra needed to be on campus because her position required interaction with students, staff and the public. The court found that argument potentially at odds with an accommodation specifically designed to place her on campus when fewer people were present.

"The issue is that the precise essential functions ostensibly requiring in-person hours are undermined by the design of the in-person hours arrangement, which was set up specifically to prevent Plaintiff's contact with others," Bernal wrote.

The court emphasized that Title VII does not require an employer to provide an employee's preferred accommodation. It does, however, require the accommodation provided to be reasonable. "Ultimately, based on the present record, the Court simply cannot conclude that Chaffey's provided accommodations were reasonable," Bernal wrote. "The reasonableness of these accommodations is a question for the jury."

PJI attorney Nelo Sharif said the ruling recognizes an important distinction between granting a religious exemption and providing a reasonable accommodation.

"An employer does not satisfy its obligations under Title VII simply by approving a religious exemption on paper," Sharif said. "The accommodation that follows must still be reasonable. Ms. Bonilla-Guerra was required to report to campus at 5 a.m. precisely so that she would have little contact with others, even though Chaffey argued that her presence on campus was necessary because her job required interaction with other people. The court recognized that a jury should decide whether that arrangement was reasonable."

Chaffey subsequently asked the court to reconsider its decision. PJI opposed the request, and the court denied Chaffey's motion for reconsideration, leaving the July ruling in place and allowing the case to move toward trial.

The court also allowed Bonilla-Guerra's Title VII retaliation claim to proceed. Her allegations include a fragmented work schedule, an initial attempt to relocate her workstation to a storage closet, additional work assignments and required use of paid leave. The court determined that whether those actions constituted unlawful retaliation presents a question for the jury.

PJI Founder and President Brad Dacus said the ruling allows Bonilla-Guerra to present her case to a jury.

"Religious accommodation cannot become a label attached to an arrangement that places an unreasonable burden on an employee because of her faith," Dacus said. "Maritssa asked to remain faithful to her religious convictions while continuing to serve Chaffey College. We are pleased that the court has rejected the district's attempts to end her case before a jury can hear the evidence."

The court has not determined whether Bonilla-Guerra will ultimately prevail. Its ruling finds that factual disputes concerning the reasonableness of the accommodation and alleged retaliation must be resolved at trial.

Read the U.S. District Court's July 23, 2026, order denying Chaffey College District's motion for summary judgment here.

Learn more about Pacific Justice Institute's work defending religious freedom, parental rights, and constitutional rights nationwide.

If your religious rights have been violated in the workplace, contact Pacific Justice Institute by completing a GET HELP FORM.

To help PJI continue providing legal representation without charge to individuals whose religious freedom and constitutional rights are threatened, we invite you to SUPPORT PJI with a tax-deductible gift today.