A federal judge has sided pro-life organizations challenging an amended Michigan law that required them to hire employees who support abortion and to cover abortion in employer-sponsored healthcare plans. Litigation is expected to continue at the state level.
In an opinion Friday, Judge Robert Jonker of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing an amended civil rights law prohibiting employers from treating “an individual affected by pregnancy, childbirth, the termination of a pregnancy, or a related medical condition differently for any employment-related purpose.”
The plaintiffs, Right to Life of Michigan and Pregnancy Resource Center, argued the law would force them to act against their pro-life mission.
Jonker’s ruling comes five months after the pro-life groups sued Michigan’s Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel, Michigan Department of Civil Rights Executive Director John Johnson, and members of the Michigan Civil Rights Commission. The lawsuit claims 2023 amendments to the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act violate the groups’ First and 14th Amendment rights by forcing them to hire employees who have had abortions or support abortion, in direct opposition to their pro-life mission.
The amended law also removed an option for employers to opt out of covering abortion in their healthcare plans. The plaintiffs challenged that provision too, asking the court to declare the law unconstitutional and to bar state officials from enforcing it against them.
Jonker, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled that a challenge to the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act belongs in the Michigan Supreme Court rather than a federal court. Still, he granted the preliminary injunction, finding the plaintiffs were “likely to succeed on the merits” of their case by showing that the relevant parts of the law “‘substantially burden’ their expression or ‘threaten the very mission’ of their organizations.”
“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,” said Bryan Neihart, senior counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom, the nonprofit legal organization representing the plaintiffs.
“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.”
Amber Roseboom, president of Right to Life of Michigan, offered a similar assessment in a statement shared with The Christian Post.
“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.”
Roseboom said the ruling “calls into question the radical abortion-only response to unplanned pregnancy that Democrats in our state continue to push.”
“Seeking to undermine organizations that offer life-saving choices is counterintuitive,” the activist said. “For choice to truly exist, every woman must have the opportunity to make a choice for life if she would like to do so.”
Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: [email protected]
