U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division./ Image: miwd.uscourts.gov
On February 6, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a lawsuit on behalf of two pro-life organizations challenging a Michigan state law they say will force them to “recruit and hire individuals who oppose their fundamental beliefs and mission.”
The lawsuit challenges amendments to the state’s employment discrimination law’s definition of “sex” to include “termination of a pregnancy.”
The state also removed previous language that made clear that pregnancy-related medical conditions did not include “nontherapeutic abortions.”
Additionally, Michigan repealed its Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act, which allowed employers to decline to cover abortion in health insurance plans.
In 2023, with Democrats controlling the governorship and both chambers of the legislature, they passed the Reproductive Health Act (RHA), a package of bills repealing several longstanding abortion restrictions.
From the lawsuit:
Recent changes to Michigan’s employment law force religious and pro-life groups to employ and associate with persons who do not share or live by—and may even oppose—the organizations’ beliefs on human life. This violates the First Amendment. Plaintiffs Right to Life of Michigan (Right to Life) and Pregnancy Resource Center (PRC) recruit, hire, and retain only employees who adhere to, agree to abide by, and can effectively communicate their pro-life views. This employment policy puts them at odds with Michigan’s new law. Right to Life and PRC bring this suit to ensure they can continue to serve Michiganders without diluting their pro-life views through the lukewarm or hostile hires Michigan’s law demands.
******
Michigan’s new employment law threatens these organizations. It redefined “sex” discrimination to include “the termination of a pregnancy.” MCL 37.2201(d). This amendment filters through every mention of “sex” in Michigan’s employment law. Now, it is illegal to “refuse to hire or recruit,” “discriminate,” or “deprive” applicants of an “employment opportunity” because of their support for, or decision to have, an abortion. MCL 37.2202(1)(a)–(b), (d). Employers cannot post job openings indicating a “preference, limitation, [or] specification” for employees with specific views on abortion or ask applicants about their views. MCL 37.2206(1)–(2). And employers must cover abortions as an employee “benefit” if they offer pregnancy coverage. MCL 37.2202(1)(c).
Right to Life and PRC are employers under Michigan’s law. Michigan’s law thus requires them to recruit and hire those with pro-abortion views, restricts these groups from explaining their pro-life requirements to applicants, and requires these groups to offer abortion coverage in their insurance plans because they generally offer insurance to their employees. Because they won’t, they risk severe penalties, like five-figure fines, loss of state-issued licenses, and more.
ADF explains, “It is now illegal for Right to Life of Michigan and Pregnancy Resource Center to recruit and hire only those employees who share their pro-life 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.”
ADF Senior Counsel Bryan Neihart noted, “It makes no sense to force pro-life organizations to hire employees who disagree with that view. Pro-life groups should be free to share the message of hope and joy with women and families experiencing a difficult season through employees who share their common goal.”
“Right to Life and Pregnancy Resource Center both recognize that every woman deserves real support to make the healthiest choice for her and her unborn baby. But Michigan’s law forces these organizations to contradict their beliefs and to employ staff who endorse abortion—a decision that harms women and ends innocent lives.”
Right to Life of Michigan offers life-affirming education and advocates for pro-life policies across the state.
Pregnancy Resource Center provides women with medical care, resources, and support structures to help them through their pregnancies.
Both organizations hire like-minded individuals who share their convictions about the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death and depend on employees to promote their pro-life views to the public and to encourage other staff.
ADF attorneys note that both organizations have refrained from including their pro-life mission statements in job postings and have even received some applications from people who identified themselves as “pro-abortion.”
Attorneys filed Right to Life of Michigan v. Nessel with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division.
You can read the lawsuit here.
The post New Lawsuit Claims Michigan Anti-Discrimination Law Compels Pro-Life Groups to Hire Pro-Abortion Staff appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.