Christian employers seek injunction against Biden rule on transgender litigation payments

A national group representing Christian employers has sued the Biden administration over mandates that religious nonprofit and for-profit employers fund “gender-bridging surgeries, procedures, counseling and treatment,” they said. said lawyers for the Defending Freedom Alliance.

The action, filed in Federal District Court in Bozeman, Montana, on behalf of the Christian Employers Alliance, which represents nonprofit and for-profit organizations, is the latest of several actions involving the warrants.

On Tuesday, the public interest law firm filed a petition asking a federal court to immediately suspend implementation of the measures.

The Montana lawsuit argues that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, misinterprets and improperly enforces the gender discrimination rules in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act in order require employers to provide medical coverage and gender transition procedures.

They also argue that the application of a similar mandate by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will require religious health care providers to “physically perform, facilitate or promote surgeries and bridging procedures. gender who are contrary to their deeply held religious beliefs. and expert medical judgment.

According to a statement by ECA President Shannon Royce, “Employers and contractors, like many Americans, are increasingly concerned about rising costs which can be attributed in part to oppressive government mandates.”

She added that the new rules would create “a unique quagmire of concern for religious health care providers by forcing them to speak positively about gender transition procedures even if they disagree with them.”

Senior ADF attorney Matt Bowman in a statement accused President Biden of going beyond a president’s authority in issuing warrants.

“By misinterpreting and inappropriately applying federal law, President Biden has far exceeded his constitutional authority, to the detriment of people of faith across the country,” Bowman said. “The government cannot force Christian employers to pay for or physically perform harmful medical procedures that contradict their religious beliefs. “

An ADF lawsuit in August 2021, filed on behalf of the American College of Pediatricians, the Catholic Medical Association, and Dr Jeanie Dassow, took the on-duty administration to require physicians to perform gender transition procedures regardless of the physician’s medical judgment or religious beliefs.

“Doctors should never be forced to perform a controversial and often medically dangerous procedure that goes against their best judgment, conscience or religion, especially when dealing with vulnerable children suffering from pain. mental and emotional confusion, ”said Julie Marie Blake, ADF Senior Advisor. the weather.

“Forcing physicians to engage in experimental medicine that poses a risk to patients – or faces huge financial penalties, the withdrawal of federal funding, or the removal of their ability to practice medicine – is an extreme violation. constitutional rights of physicians and certainly not in the best interests of the patients they serve.

These are not the first cases requiring federal judicial intervention in the case.

In March, Dignity Health, which operates Mercy San Juan Medical Center in Sacramento, Calif., Asked the Supreme Court to hear its case concerning the Catholic hospital’s refusal to perform a hysterectomy on a transgender man in part of its transition.

Mercy said such a procedure would be a procedure that “would directly contravene Catholic teachings and doctrines.”

The High Court has not announced a decision on the Dignity Health petition.

Challenges involving the reading of Title VII by the Biden administration could run up against a 2020 Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia.

There, a 6-3 majority that included Justice Neil Gorsuch and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., concluded that the reference to “sex” in the 1964 law protected transgender people from discrimination in matters of gender. employment, even if such a reading was not “anticipated”. at the time the law was promulgated.

In a statement to the Washington Times, Mr. Bowman said that “the Biden administration illegally uses the Bostock decision as an excuse to rewrite all civil rights laws in all contexts, having nothing to do with the court ruling , and even in violation of religious freedom. , which Bostock says supersedes his close involvement.

Subscribe to daily newsletters

Source link

Previous Stepmom Has $ 100,000 in Student Loan Debt: Financial Advice.
Next Engage students for conservation practices

No Comment

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *