Get a free copy of Parental Rights & Education when you subscribe to our newsletter!
[UPDATE] The federal government has agreed to pay $210,000 in attorney’s fees and costs after a court found that it had attempted to unconstitutionally force Christian employers, including churches and faith-based businesses, to cover employees’ gender transition procedures.
In March, a federal judge ruled that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) had violated the religious liberty rights of members of the Christian Employers Alliance (CEA) when it misapplied both Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Section 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) to try to force for-profit and non-profit organizations to pay for employees’ gender transition treatments.
In permanently halting enforcement of the transgender mandate on members of the CEA, U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Traynor wrote, “When the government imposes a direct monetary penalty to coerce conduct that violates religious belief, there has never been a question that the government imposes a substantial burden on the exercise of religion.”
On Wednesday, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which represented CEA in the lawsuit, announced that the EEOC has agreed to pay $210,000 in attorney’s fees and costs and to dismiss the case, meaning that the government will not appeal Judge Traynor’s decision.
“The employers we represent believe that God purposefully created humans as either male or female, and so it would violate their religious beliefs to pay for or perform life-altering medical procedures or surgeries that seek to change one’s sex,” stated Matt Bowman, senior counsel and director of ADF’s Regulatory Practice.
“We’re pleased to favorably conclude this lawsuit on behalf of our clients and hold the administration accountable for trying to force unlawful mandates that disrespect people of faith.”
CEA President Shannon Royce celebrated the result, saying,
“We are overjoyed our members will not have to choose between the biblically based employee benefits and quality healthcare they provide, and the threat of federal enforcement and massive costs for practicing their faith.”
Royce has repeatedly cautioned that the ruling, and subsequent agreement, only covers members of the CEA, not unaffiliated Christian employers and ministries; however, if those organizations join CEA, the ruling would apply, giving them legal protection against government mandates to provide insurance coverage that goes against their deeply held religious beliefs.
{Published March 8, 2024} Earlier this week a federal court ruled that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) cannot force religious employers and healthcare providers to provide gender transition treatments against their religious beliefs.
Judge Daniel M. Traynor of the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota granted the request for partial summary judgement made by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) on behalf of its client, Christian Employers Alliance (CEA).
CEA is a “Christian membership ministry that exists to unite and serve Christian non-profit and for-profit employers who wish to live out their faith in every-day life, including their homes, schools, ministries, businesses, and communities.”
ADF filed the suit in October 2021, alleging that EEOC’s interpretation of Title VII’s ban on discrimination on the basis of sex that required religious employers to pay for employees’ gender transition treatments and surgeries violates Christian employers’ sincerely held religious beliefs.
The suit also challenged the Department for Health and Human Services’ (HHS) definition of “sex,” which includes gender identity. Under that definition, those who receive federal funding are required to perform or facilitate transgender surgeries.
CEA had asked the court to issue a summary judgment, which is a ruling entered by the court without a full trial, on two of its claims. CEA asked the court to declare that the EEOC’s demands regarding gender transition surgeries violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and to grant a permanent injunction blocking EEOC from enforcing the demands on CEA’s members.
In order to grant summary judgment, the facts of the case must be indisputable and it must be clear which party would win in a trial.
The court agreed with CEA that the demand by EEOC violates CEA members’ right to free exercise of religion and that EEOC did not use the least restrictive means of achieving its goals.
Judge Traynor ruled,
“CEA will succeed on the merits. As noted in its Order Granting Preliminary Injunction, this Court determined that if CEA had to comply with these mandates, its members would have to violate their sincerely held religious beliefs which is an impermissible exercise under the First Amendment and RFRA.”
Referencing several religious liberty cases, Traynor stated that the right to free exercise of religion is substantially burdened “when it coerces private individuals into violating their religious beliefs or penalizes them for those beliefs by denying them the ‘rights, benefits, and privileges enjoyed by other citizens,” adding, “When the government imposes a direct monetary penalty to coerce conduct that violates religious belief, there has never been a question that the government imposes a substantial burden on the exercise of religion.”
Judge Traynor further noted that because “CEA’s sincerely held religious belief is that male and female are immutable realities defined by biological sex and that gender reassignment is contrary to Christian Values,” then “performing or providing health care coverage for gender transition services under the EEOC and HHS coverage mandates impinges upon CEA’s beliefs. CEA must either comply with the EEOC and HHS mandates by violating their sincerely held religious beliefs or else face harsh consequences like paying fines and facing civil liability.”
The court granted a permanent injunction against HHS from enforcing the transgender treatment order on CEA’s members, declared that EEOC’s interpretation of Title VII violates the RFRA, and blocked the EEOC from enforcing its interpretation of Title VII on CEA’s members.
CEA President Shannon Royce responded to the ruling in a statement, saying,
“CEA members are grateful for this decisive ruling and for our attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom, who worked tirelessly on our behalf to dispute the administration’s radical transgender mandates. We are overjoyed our members will not have to choose between the biblically based employee benefits and quality health care they provide, and the threat of federal enforcement and massive costs for practicing their faith.”
However, Royce cautioned that the victory is not universal, explaining,
“There are thousands of other Christian-owned, -operated, or -led businesses and ministries that still endure intense pressure and scrutiny by agencies, financial firms, and even employees, to acquiesce to the culture’s attempt to redefine biology. We encourage these businesses ― regardless of status, region, or industry ― to join CEA now and benefit from the legal protection afforded by today’s ruling.”
ADF Senior counsel Matt Bowman also weighed in on the ruling by stating,
“All employers and healthcare providers, including those in the Christian Employers Alliance, have the constitutionally protected freedom to conduct their business and render treatment in a manner consistent with their deeply held religious beliefs. The employers we represent believe that God purposefully created humans as either male or female, and so it would violate their religious beliefs to pay for or perform life-altering medical procedures or surgeries that seek to change one’s sex. The court was on firm ground to stop the administration from enforcing these unlawful mandates that disrespect people of faith.”
This ruling is something to be excited about, but it is just one court victory in what is likely to be a long judicial and political conflict. Other employers, doctors, and insurance providers are still fighting this religious liberty battle and could ultimately be required to pay for or be part of transgender treatments. Under the Constitution and RFRA, no person, or company, should be forced to pay for, participate in, facilitate, or even recognize as legitimate these transgender experiments.
For over a decade the left and the federal government have harassed religious organizations in an attempt to force them to pay for various medical services and drugs that violate their beliefs. Courts have repeatedly ruled that religious organizations or religious employers are not required to provide drugs or funding for procedures that violate their religious beliefs.
One of the very first cases involving this aggressive push to violate the right of free exercise of religion began in 2011 when the federal government attempted to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide contraceptive coverage, including the “week-after” abortion pill, in their health insurance plans. This order of Catholic nuns sued, and in 2016, the Supreme Court unanimously sided with the plaintiffs in a consolidated case that included the Little Sisters. The case was sent back to lower courts for resolution, and in 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services wrote a rule exempting religious non-profits like the Little Sisters.
Despite this win, the Little Sisters were back in court after the state of Pennsylvania sued the federal government to try to take away the nuns’ religious exemption to the HHS contraceptive mandate. In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled once again in their favor in the case of Little Sisters v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that even some closely held corporations cannot be forced to provide contraception in violation of their religious beliefs.
Federal appellate court have also ruled in favor of religious organizations in cases involving transgender treatments, including in Sisters of Mercy v. Becerra and in Franciscan Alliance v. Becerra.
Forcing anyone to violate their religious beliefs is unconstitutional. Yet until the Supreme Court hands down a clear decision protecting the right of free exercise of religion for organizations, companies, employers, and individuals, the left will continue to try to force them to violate their beliefs.
It is time our nation listen to the words of our first president, George Washington, who so wisely wrote,
“Every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience.”
That is the promise of America, and one that the government needs to honor — no matter what the current cultural trends demand.
If you like this article and other content that helps you apply a biblical worldview to today’s politics and culture, consider making a donation here.
