Re: Religious Liberty Protection for Catholic Benefits Association Members from EEOC Mandates Related to Abortion and IVF Accommodation, False Pronouns, and Opposite Sex Access to Bathrooms
Dear Members of the Catholic Benefits Association,
I’m delighted to provide you with a report about and a copy of the September 23 order granting a preliminary injunction for the benefit of Catholic Benefits Association members issued by the United States District Court for North Dakota.
In this case, Judge Daniel M. Traynor enjoined the EEOC from enforcing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and its implementing regulation and from enforcing EEOC’s enforcement guidance on sexual harassment “in a manner that would require [CBA present or future members] “to accommodate abortion or infertility treatments that are contrary to the Catholic faith, . . . use pronouns inconsistent with a person’s biological sex; or allow persons to use private spaces for the opposite sex.”
As part of our advocacy, we explained that the EEOC is now interpreting the anti-retaliation, anti-coercion, and anti-harassment provisions in the law to impose a gender ideology speech code on CBA members. This code not only mandated use of false pronouns, it would, at best, have a chilling effect on Catholic employers explaining Catholic teaching regarding abortion, IVF, gender transition to employees contemplating the same. The court would have none of it as it also enjoined the EEOC from applying its rules that would require CBA members to speak in favor of or refrain from speaking against abortion, immoral infertility treatments, or gender transition.
The Court’s injunction not only restrains the EEOC from “enforcing” these mandates, it restrains the EEOC from investigating charges of discrimination related to these rules. It also prohibits the EEOC from issuing “right-to-sue letters.” Because right-to-sue letters are the predicate for private (employee) lawsuits, the injunction effectively blocks those suits, allowing our members to focus on their ministry and work.
Judge Traynor’s order also made an important finding. It applied the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to protect CBA members and future members so long as they are “members of the CBA at the time of the charged conduct,” but stated that Catholic employers “cannot run for protection under CBA membership after the fact.” If you know of organizations that aren’t members of CBA, this is a good time to recommend they become members.
While we do not typically send our members copies of courts’ rulings, this one is worth reading because the Court wrote fervently about the government’s consistent disregard for the country’s foundational respect for religious freedom.
The current suit falls into a long line of cases that should be unnecessary in a country that was built on the concept of freedom of religion. Unfortunately, these cases are essential for faithful individuals where government mandates run counter to core religious beliefs. One would think after all this litigation, the government would respect the boundaries of religious freedom. Instead, it seems the goal may be to find new ways to infringe on religious believers’ fundamental rights to the exercise of their religions.
Order at p.2. On page 19 of its order, the Court wrote that “[t]his challenge to religious liberty is a reminder of the danger of government action that is clearly anti-religion.” In the related footnote, the Court likened CBA members as standing against “unchecked government” in the tradition of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Blessed Miguel Pro, and St. Thomas More.
Our team could only acquire an order like this because each of you have supported the Catholic Benefits Association and because members, when asked to do so, have served as named plaintiffs or have provided information or declarations in support of our advocacy. It is the “power of association” once more.
Cordially,
L. Martin Nussbaum
First & Fourteenth
CBA General Counsel
Read the Order Granting Preliminary Injunction Here.