Oregon Wants To Make Christians Pay For Abortions

A legal challenge in Oregon, where the state requires organizations with deep religious objections to the intentional termination of unborn lives to cover abortion costs, has been brought back to life.

Oregon Right to Life filed the suit against state Insurance Commissioner Andrew Stolfi back in 2023, alleging that the Reproductive Health Equity Act infringed on First Amendment protections for religious freedom and expression.

Previously, a lower court judge had dismissed the case, but according to a recent update from Courthouse News, the lawsuit is moving forward once more.

Judge Lawrence VanDyke wrote an opinion from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on the case stating: “ORTL put forth significant evidence of its religiosity, and there was no conflicting evidence against ORTL’s claim that its views are religiously grounded.”

He continued: “The district court therefore erred by failing to conclude at the motion to dismiss stage that ORTL actually holds the beliefs professed in the complaint and that ORTL’s opposition to abortion is genuinely religious.”

With this ruling, the case advances.

The argument presented by Oregon Right to Life is over the fact that forcing the pro-life organization to finance abortions through employee insurance plans is a clear breach of pre-existing constitutional safeguards.

Oregon’s 2017 legislation mandates abortion coverage by employers. The bill includes an important key, however, as it also allows faith-based entities to select plans that omit such benefits.

U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken, appointed by Bill Clinton, sided with the idea that the organization’s absence of formal religious mandates doomed its claim and tossed the suit.

ORTL’s lawyer James Bopp, stated in an appeals court hearing, “There are numerous assertions in the record by Oregon Right to Life that their belief in the sanctity of individual human life and opposition to abortion is based upon religious tenets.”

State authorities insist the group doesn’t qualify as religious, even as Oregon Right to Life pointed to its founding statements embracing Judeo-Christian principles.

The court said, “It is worth pointing out that the unanimous Supreme Court emphasized that the issue in Catholic Charities (and a fortiori the issue here) was not a ‘hard call.’ That was because the court was breaking no new ground. Since long before Catholic Charities, it has been black letter law that the Free Exercise Clause bars laws that discriminate against some or all religious beliefs.”

Thank you for your support.

If you appreciate the work we do to spread the good news of Jesus Christ, please consider giving a gift to help us continue this work. Maranatha!