CASE 132,EEOC V

CASE 13.2,EEOC v.Abercrombie & Fitch Stores,Inc.(2015) involved a question of whether a clothing retailer violated Title VII when it refused to hire a Muslim woman-applicant because she wore a head scarf in violation of its company dress code,and whether the applicant gave proper notice of a religious accommodation.How did the court rule?

A) The employer violated Title VII because an employer may not make an applicant's religious practice,confirmed or otherwise,a factor in employment decisions.
B) The employer violated Title VII because it cannot institute work dress code policies.
C) The employer did not violate Title VII because the employer did not have to accommodate the wearing of the scarf because such accommodation would place an undue hardship on the employer.
D) The employer did not violate Title VII because the applicant failed to give proper notice of a religious accommodation.