Oregon lets Christian mother adopt without affirming LGBTQ ideology following legal win 

Oregon will let a Christian widow adopt children without forcing her to affirm beliefs about sex and gender that violate her faith.

This offers more than a personal exemption for Jessica Bates and follows a legal victory – one that could reverberate into other states.

The Oregon Department of Human Services changed its statewide rule Aug. 20, after Bates prevailed at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. A federal judge then entered a final order Sept. 9 requiring Oregon to withdraw its rejection of her application and let her restart the process.

“ODHS is prohibited from requiring Bates to agree to use prescribed words or language, including chosen pronouns, to express views about sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression inconsistent with her religious beliefs described above as a condition of certification,” the order said.

The old rule forced prospective foster and adoptive parents to “respect, accept and support” a child’s sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

Oregon can still consider each child’s needs when choosing a home. The order doesn’t guarantee Bates a child, but it lets her seek one without having to pass a state-mandated ideological test.

‘Nudged’ by God to adopt

Bates is a widowed mother of five. Her husband died in a car crash in 2017. She said her Christian faith made her want to adopt two children from Oregon’s foster care system.

She completed the state’s training but wouldn’t promise to use pronouns that conflict with a child’s sex. She also didn’t want to take children to Pride events or help them obtain puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

Oregon rejected her in 2022, even though she wanted young children who shared her family’s beliefs.

“As a widowed mom of five, I was surprised to feel God nudging me to adopt. I never dreamt it would lead to a years-long lawsuit when Oregon excluded me just because of my religious convictions about gender,” Bates said. “I am grateful for ADF picking up my case, advocating for my and every American’s rights, and helping ensure many great homes can remain candidates to help the children in foster care.”

Alliance Defending Freedom sued the state on her behalf in 2023. At first, a federal district judge sided with Oregon. However, the 9th Circuit reversed this ruling in July 2025.

The appeals court ruled Oregon compelled speech about sex and gender. It also found the rule wasn’t neutral toward religion.

“Adoption is not a constitutional law dead zone,” the court said. “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.”

The court said Oregon could protect children through simpler steps. The state could consider gender-related issues while matching a child with a family or provide more oversight after a placement. Oregon didn’t show why it had to stop Bates from adopting any child.

The full 9th Circuit declined to reconsider the ruling in February. Oregon later dropped the requirement statewide before settling the case.

The change could help other Christian families in Oregon because they no longer face the same written mandate. The ruling could matter elsewhere because the 9th Circuit covers California, Washington and other Western states. Its published decision gives families a basis to challenge similar rules.

Heartlander News previously reported Vermont changed its statewide policy after two Christian families sued.

ADF calls the latest ruling a victory for parental rights.

“Every child deserves a loving home, and children suffer when the government excludes people of faith from foster care because of the state’s own ideological crusade,” ADF Senior Counsel Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse said.

“Oregon officials turned Jessica away just because of her common-sense belief that parents should help children become comfortable with who they are instead of pushing them down a path of confusion and medicalization,” she added. “We believe this settlement is a win-win that protects constitutional rights and puts children’s interests first.”

(Image credit: adflegal.org)