An Illinois law may force religious employers to hire people who take actions that contradict their sincerely held religious beliefs, such as undergoing or performing an abortion, a new lawsuit claims.
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield, along with the Pregnancy Care Center of Rockford, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Western Division Thursday challenging the newly amended Illinois Human Rights Act.
The legislation prohibits employers from engaging in “unlawful discrimination” based on a person’s “reproductive health decisions.”
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.
The term “reproductive health decisions” is defined as encompassing “a person’s decisions regarding the person’s use of: contraception; fertility or sterilization care; assisted reproductive technologies; miscarriage management care; healthcare related to the continuation or termination of pregnancy; or prenatal, intranatal, or postnatal care.”
The Employment Clause of the Illinois Human Rights Act makes it a civil rights violation for an employer to “refuse to hire … or to act with respect to recruitment, hiring, promotion, renewal of employment, selection for training or apprenticeship, discharge, discipline, [or] tenure [. . .] on the basis of unlawful discrimination, citizenship status, or work authorization status” pertaining to a long list of protected characteristics, which now includes ‘reproductive health.'”
The employee handbook of the Pregnancy Care Center of Rockford explicitly declares that “referring, assisting in the procurement of, providing, or receiving an abortion … is cause for refusal to hire,” the complaint states. Meanwhile, the Diocese of Springfield subjects its employees to “disciplinary action, up to and including termination” if they fail to “conduct themselves in a moral and ethical manner consistent with Catholic principles.” Having or assisting in an abortion would fall into this category.
The plaintiffs fear they could face litigation under the Illinois Human Rights Act for its policies requiring employees to abide by Christian beliefs when it comes to the sanctity of human life based on statements made by the defendants — Director of the Illinois Department of Human Rights James Bennett and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul.
The Illinois Human Rights Act proclaims that “‘Employer’ does not include any place of worship, religious corporation, association, educational institution, society, or non-profit nursing institution … with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such place of worship, corporation, association, educational institution, society or non-profit nursing institution of its activities.'”
However, the complaint maintains that “Defendants do not apply this religious exclusion to Plaintiffs’ conduct in matters of reproduction.”
“Attorney General Kwame Raoul joined an amicus brief to argue that Title VII’s identical statutory religious exemption allows religious organizations to give preference to coreligionists, but does not authorize religious organizations to discriminate against employees based on any other protected ground — like reproductive decision-making — ‘even if such discrimination is consistent with (or mandated by) religious tenets,'” the lawsuit stated.
The defendants, Raoul and Bennett, have not commented publicly about the lawsuit despite media requests.
The plaintiffs ask the court to declare the Illinois Human Rights Act a violation of multiple clauses in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the 14th Amendment.
The lawsuit asks a federal judge for a preliminary and permanent injunction “to stop Defendants and any person acting in concert with them from investigating or otherwise enforcing the Act against Plaintiffs in connection with Plaintiffs’ speech and conduct related to reproductive decisions.”
Mark Lippelmann, a senior counsel with the Christian conservative legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents the plaintiffs, contends that the state “can’t force pro-life religious organizations to bend their knee to the state’s secular view of abortion.”
“The Constitution protects the right of religious organizations to choose workers who will advance — rather than contradict — their religious beliefs,” he said in a statement. “We urge the court to uphold these organizations’ fundamental right to serve their communities consistent with their faith.”
Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield said the diocese’s employees “represent the DIocese and are expected to uphold our standards of conduct to ensure they align with the doctrine and moral teaching of the Catholic Church.”
“However, under the state law, we cannot hire or retain employees based on our deeply held religious beliefs on pro-life teachings without being subject to disciplinary action,” the bishop said in a statement. “We must have the freedom to follow and express our convictions without government interference.”
Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com
