(The Lion) — An Oregon Christian mom can now begin the process of adoption while her lawsuit moves forward – after the state blocked her application due to her Christian views on gender ideology.
Jessica Bates, a widowed mother of five described in court documents as a “devout Christian” who wants to adopt two young children, was barred from doing so because her religious beliefs clashed with Oregon’s adoption policies. The state requires prospective parents who adopt children from foster care to agree to “respect, accept, and support” the child’s gender identity and expression. But Bates believes the “Bible accurately describes the differences between men and women” and that people “should not seek to change their sex or engage in any behavior or speech to suggest a male can be a female, or vice-versa.”
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday instructed the Oregon Department of Human Services to reconsider her application, noting that Bates, who is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, is likely to prevail in showing the state violated her First Amendment rights. The ruling means she is free to re-start the application process to adopt as the lawsuit is pending.
Alliance Defending Freedom president Kristen Waggoner called the ruling a “huge win” on X.
“This widowed Oregon mom was categorically barred from adopting a foster child – regardless of the child’s age or beliefs – because she wouldn’t promise to affirm gender ideology. The 9th Circuit ruled that Oregon’s policy likely violates Jessica’s First Amendment rights to free speech and religious liberty,” she wrote.
Noting similar ADF cases in Vermont and Washington, Waggoner said such policies “are all too common in left-leaning states” and “harm children who need loving families more than anyone else.”
ADF senior counsel Jonathan Scruggs said children deserve loving families and “suffer when the government excludes people of faith from the adoption and foster system.”
“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,” he said in a statement. “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 Lion has reached out to the Oregon Department of Human Services for comment.
In its opinion, the appeals court panel noted freedom of religion is rooted in a “constitutional principle: that the government may not insist upon our adherence to state-favored orthodoxies, whether of a religious or political variety,” and “nor can the state condition ‘receipt of an important benefit’ upon our agreement to the same.”
No one believes a state could prohibit parents from adopting based on their “political views, race, or religious affiliations,” the court added.
“Adoption is not a constitutional law dead zone,” the opinion reads. “And a state’s general conception of the child’s best interest does not create a force field against the valid operation of other constitutional rights.”
