Starting pitcher Landen Roupp wrote “Genesis 9:12-16” on the brim of his cap, referencing the biblical passage describing God’s covenant with Noah and the rainbow. Relief pitchers JT Brubaker and Ryan Walker also wrote Scripture references on their hats. Another Giants pitcher, Sam Hentges, reportedly wore the team’s standard cap instead of the Pride-themed version.
According to MLB, none of the players were fined or formally disciplined. League officials instead issued verbal warnings, telling the players that writing on their hats violated uniform regulations and advising them that future violations could result in disciplinary action.
MLB defended its response in a public statement, saying, “This routine verbal warning not to wear the hat in future games is not disciplinary and had absolutely nothing to do with the content of the message.”
That explanation has not ended the controversy.
On June 18, Dhillon publicly announced that she had referred the matter to the EEOC for further review, opening her statement with the words, “Swing and a miss.”
In her letter to MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred, Dhillon argued that the league’s handling of the situation raises questions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on religion and requires employers to reasonably accommodate employees’ religious practices under many circumstances.
Dhillon pointed to MLB’s actions during the 2020 season, when the league authorized “Black Lives Matter” messaging on pitching mounds, uniform patches reading “Black Lives Matter” and “United for Change,” and allowed players to display approved social justice messages on their cleats.
“This double standard – under which players may not inscribe Bible verses on hats for one game only but may wear ‘Black Lives Matter’ patches for one game only – calls MLB’s true motives into question and raises serious concerns about MLB’s compliance with Title VII,” Dhillon wrote.
She continued, “The Civil Rights Act prohibits MLB and its franchises from unreasonably burdening the rights of players with religious objections to serving as the League’s vehicle for pro-Pride messages. Federal law is clear: employers must modify their uniform requirements to reasonably accommodate their employees’ exercise of religion.”
Dhillon also cited the Supreme Court’s decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., which held that employers can violate Title VII by failing to accommodate religious practices even if an employee has not made a formal accommodation request.
The federal referral is not the only legal challenge MLB now faces.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced that his office has issued an investigative subpoena seeking records related to MLB’s enforcement of its uniform policy dating back to 2020. According to Uthmeier, the subpoena requests documentation concerning political messaging exceptions as well as religious accommodation requests that may have been granted or denied.
“If MLB applauds ideological messages it prefers while reprimanding expressions of Christian faith, that is not neutral rule enforcement – it is religious discrimination,” Uthmeier wrote.
Missouri Senator Josh Hawley has also entered the debate, sending his own letter to Commissioner Manfred requesting information about previous enforcement of the league’s uniform policy. Hawley specifically asked whether players had ever received warnings for displaying messages such as “BLM,” “love is love,” or other political or social slogans.
Speaking to Fox News Digital, Hawley said, “MLB has a sweetheart deal from the federal government. They play by different rules than any other business in America. But now MLB is using its power to target Christians and trample free speech.”
The latest dispute has also revived discussion about MLB’s longstanding antitrust exemption, a unique legal status that dates back to a 1922 Supreme Court decision. Hawley has indicated that if the league imposes formal discipline against the players, Congress could revisit that exemption as part of a broader review.
The controversy has also prompted renewed attention to Commissioner Manfred’s previous involvement in politically sensitive issues, including MLB’s 2021 decision to relocate the All-Star Game from Atlanta following criticism of Georgia’s election law.
Whether the EEOC ultimately opens a formal investigation or determines that MLB violated Title VII remains to be seen. If the agency proceeds, the league could be required to provide internal communications, policy documents, and other records related to its enforcement of uniform rules and religious accommodation practices.
For now, the debate continues to grow, with critics arguing that MLB has applied its policies inconsistently, while the league maintains that its response was based solely on enforcement of existing uniform regulations rather than the religious content of the players’ messages.
