BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judge. Sandra Sabastian-Andres, an indigenous Mayan Akateko woman from Guatemala now living in the United States, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The Immigration Judge denied all three claims for relief, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. The Board agreed with the Immigration Judge that Sabastian-Andres did not demonstrate a nexus between her particular social group and the harm she experienced and did not show that the government of Guatemala acquiesced in her mistreatment there. Because the Board’s conclusions were supported by substantial evidence, we deny her petition for review.

BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judge. The MetroHealth System, an Ohio hospital, denied all employee requests for religious exemptions from its COVID-19 vaccine mandate. It granted some employee requests for medical exemptions. A little over a month later, MetroHealth changed its mind about the religious exemption requests and granted all of them. Frank Savel, a former MetroHealth employee who resigned shortly after the hospital rejected his religious exemption request, sued MetroHealth for religious discrimination. He argued that the exemption process—especially the blanket denial of religious exemptions—violated Title VII and Ohio Revised Code § 4112. Forty-five other current or former employees joined him. Most still worked at MetroHealth when they filed their complaint, but some had resigned for reasons related to the exemption process.

The district court dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The court reasoned that the plaintiffs who were still employed at MetroHealth when they filed their complaint had no standing to sue and, in the alternative, that they failed to state claims under Title VII and § 4112. It concluded that the plaintiffs who resigned by the time the complaint was filed did have standing, but that they also failed to state claims under Title VII and § 4112. The plaintiffs appeal, arguing that they have standing and that they stated claims upon which relief can be granted. We affirm as to Plaintiffs 3–46, but we reverse as to Plaintiffs 1 and 2.