The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled on July 24 that an Oregon mother will be allowed to begin the process of adopting siblings from foster care following a legal battle around her religious beliefs.
The state had rejected Jessica Bates’ adoption application because she would not vow to encourage a hypothetical child who has gender dysphoria to ‘transition.’
Key Takeaways:
- Oregon rejected Jessica Bates’ application to adopt a pair of siblings through foster care because she said she would not take a hypothetical child for hormone injections or call a child by the wrong pronouns.
- Bates filed a lawsuit that remains ongoing, arguing that the state rule ordering foster parents to agree to affirm a child’s gender dysphoria, hang pro-LGBTA+ signage, or take children to pride parades violates her First Amendment rights.
- On July 24, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Bates will be allowed to continue her adoption process as the case proceeds because it feels she will likely win the case.
The Details:
The case revolved around an Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) rule that excluded Bates from adopting any child because she would not affirm the gender dysphoria of a hypothetical child and tell them that boys can be girls and vice versa. Bates asked the Ninth Circuit to lift the exclusion rule and allow her to reapply to adopt while her lawsuit continues in court.
The court ordered the ODHS to reconsider her application because it believes she will likely succeed in proving that the rule violates her First Amendment rights.
The ruling states:
The panel held that Oregon’s application of § 413-200- 0308(2)(k) to Bates, in denying her certification to be an adoptive parent, triggers strict scrutiny for both her free speech and free exercise claims.
Strict scrutiny applies to Bates’s free speech claim because Oregon’s policy both restricts and compels speech based on content and viewpoint in the areas of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression.
Strict scrutiny applies to Bates’s free exercise claim because Oregon’s policy burdens Bates’s religious exercise and is neither neutral nor generally applicable.
It said that Oregon likely violated the First Amendment in barring Bates from adopting children from foster care.
“Every child deserves a loving home, and children suffer when the government excludes people of faith from the adoption and foster system. Jessica is a caring mom of five who is now free to adopt after Oregon officials excluded her because of her common-sense belief that a girl cannot become a boy or vice versa,” said Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) Senior Counsel and Vice President of Litigation Strategy Jonathan Scruggs, who argued before the court on behalf of Bates. “Because caregivers like Jessica cannot promote Oregon’s dangerous gender ideology to young kids and take them to events like pride parades, the state considers them to be unfit parents. That is false and incredibly dangerous, needlessly depriving kids of opportunities to find a loving home. The 9th Circuit was right to remind Oregon that the foster and adoption system is supposed to serve the best interests of children, not the state’s ideological crusade.”
The Backstory:
Two years ago, Bates applied to adopt children from foster care after feeling called to adopt following the death of her husband in a car accident.
“It was like, ‘Oh, I didn’t see that coming,’” she said, “but I feel like I need to do something.”
She had been hoping to adopt a pair of siblings under the age of nine and had provided all of the necessary information proving her financial stability, work history, background check, and had taken the required adoption training.
Barnes learned during her training that she was expected to display “symbols indicating an LGBTQ-affirming environment” and “pictures and posters of diverse people who are known to be LGBTQI2-S … and families with same-sex parents” as well as participate in “LGBTQ community activities,” and she raised her concerns.
She emailed a state adoption official about the requirements.
The official asked her if she would bring a child to receive hormone injections, and she said no. She would also not agree to use the wrong pronouns for a child or take children to LGBTQ+ parades.
Bates told ODHS that she would love and respect any child, but officials denied her application, refusing to allow her to take in any children, even those with the same values and beliefs.
She filed a lawsuit arguing that the rule violates her rights — with the help of ADF and friend-of-the-court briefs from 20 states, detransitioners, free speech advocates, religious liberty groups, and adoptive parents. They argued that the rule penalized Bates and other people for their religious views, compels parents to violate their own conscience, and deprives children of loving homes.
Follow Live Action News on Facebook and Instagram for more pro-life news.
