Judge rules Michigan pro-life groups can refuse to hire pro-abortion employees

A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked a Michigan law that would have required pro-life groups, including Right to Life of Michigan and Pregnancy Resource Center, to hire employees that support abortion and provide insurance coverage for abortions.

Key Takeaways:

• A federal judge has placed a temporary injunction on two Michigan laws.

• One prevented pro-life groups from refusing to hire someone that supports abortion; the other forced them to provide abortion coverage in their insurance plans.

• The laws had been challenged in a lawsuit brought by Right to Life of Michigan and Pregnancy Resource Center.

• The judge sent clarifying questions to the Michigan Supreme Court.

• He also insinuated that the pro-life plaintiffs were likely to win their case.

The Details:

U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker issued a preliminary injunction on July 10 against Michigan laws that prevented pro-life organizations from screening potential employees to ensure they espouse pro-life values, and required those organizations to provide insurance benefits for abortion.

Jonker also denied a request from the state to drop the case.

The injunction was issued at the request of Right to Life of Michigan, a plaintiff in the case challenging the state's laws, which was represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF).

Jonker said numerous "unsettled questions" surrounding the state's law, which he believes will best be handled by the Michigan Supreme Court. According to The Detroit News, he will send a certified question to that court, which can then choose to reject or consider the questions presented.

He also expressed belief that the pro-life groups were likely to win their case.

“In the Court’s view, if Right to Life and PRC must employ, or accept as volunteers, anyone that ‘advocates’ for abortion, and if they must also provide abortion-related care as part of their health insurance plans, ELCRA likely violates their expressive association rights,” he said.

ADF Senior Counsel Bryan Neihart, who represented the plaintiffs in court, praised the ruling:

“The government can’t force pro-life organizations to sabotage their own beliefs by requiring them to employ staff who endorse abortion—a decision that harms women and ends innocent lives.

The First Amendment protects the right of these organizations to hire employees who can carry out and share the message of hope and joy associated with the gift of life. For these pro-life groups, the messenger matters. The court made the right decision by protecting their constitutional freedom to hire employees who share their views in word and deed so that they can express messages consistent with their beliefs.”

The Backstory:

In 2023, Michigan amended its Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act [ELCRA] to add protection of "the termination of a pregnancy" under the definition of sex discrimination. Right to Life of Michigan and Pregnancy Resource Center then sued the state, arguing that change meant they could no longer refuse to hire someone based on that person's views on abortion.

The pro-life groups also challenged a separate 2023 law which repealed the Abortion Insurance Opt Out Act, which had required women to pay for an additional insurance rider for abortion coverage. With that repeal, pro-life groups were mandated to provide abortion coverage in their insurance plans.

As an ADF press release previously explained:

Michigan amended its employment law to re-define “sex” discrimination to include “the termination of a pregnancy.” It is now illegal for Right to Life of Michigan and Pregnancy Resource Center to recruit and hire only those employees who share these organizations’ pro-life views and who agree to refrain from engaging in conduct contrary to those views.

Going further, the law also requires these organizations to offer abortion coverage in their insurance plans in direct conflict with their very mission. As a result, the law threatens their ability to advocate for their pro-life views and to serve women and families in need consistent with their beliefs.

What's Next:

Jonker's ruling is only temporary, and the lawsuit will continue to make its way through the court. However, Amber Roseboom, president of Right to Life of Michigan, called the injunction a "welcome reprieve" as the case continues.

“The court’s decision is a welcome reprieve and reaffirms our fundamental right to hire employees who agree with our life-affirming mission," she said. "Any attempt by state officials to force organizations like Right to Life of Michigan to employ staff who do not agree with our fundamental mission is a wild misuse of power and defies common sense."