Pro-Life Groups Challenge New York Law Forcing Them to Hire Abortion Advocates
Last week, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled to reinstate a legal challenge brought by several pro-life organizations against a New York law that undermines their First Amendment rights to employ people who agree with their religious beliefs and mission. The Second Circuit reversed a district court’s 2020 dismissal of the case and sent it back to the lower court with instructions to adjudicate the challenge under a more recent 2023 precedent that may give their First Amendment claims merit.
Please subscribe to the LifeNews YouTube channel for the latest pro-life videos.
In CompassCare v. Hochul, the case centers around New York Labor Law Section 203-e, which remains effect, and prohibits employers from engaging in “discrimination based on an employee’s or a dependent’s reproductive health decision making.” CompassCare, a pro-life pregnancy care center, the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), a nationwide association of pro-life pregnancy care centers, and First Bible Baptist Church brought the case to protect their ability to employ only like-minded people who will not take part in abortion themselves. The organizations seek an injunction to render the law unconstitutional by contending the law infringes on their First Amendment freedoms of expressive association. They argue the law forces them to employ and associate with those who do not share the organizations’ beliefs regarding abortion, contraception, and sexual morality.
Initially, the U.S. District Court in New York in 2020 dismissed their claims that the law undermined their faith-based rights to expressive association and employ only those aligned with the organizations’ statements of faith regarding these issues. However, a three-judge panel on the Second Circuit explained that the district court had issued its decision before the Appeals Court had issued its 2023 ruling in Slattery v Hochul, a similar case involving a pro-life pregnancy center.
According to Slattery, the Second Circuit ruled that a pregnancy center may have a valid First Amendment claim if it can prove that a law forces the organization to “employ individuals who act or have acted against the very mission of its organization.” This decision by the Appeals Court instructs how the lower court should scrutinize the issue and what standard these pro-life organizations must now meet to be successful in their expressive association claims.
Circuit Court Judge Sarah Merriam wrote, “The District Court did not have the benefit of the Slattery opinion — which is now binding precedent — when it issued the orders challenged in this matter. In light of Slattery, we vacate the dismissal of Plaintiffs’ expressive-association claim.”
Judge Merriam stated that entities like CompassCare could “plausibly allege” that New York’s law compels faith-based organizations to retain employees outside their belief system. However, she cautioned that expressive association rights are “not unlimited” and cannot “erect a shield against antidiscrimination laws,” so employers must show the law impedes a specific employment decision resulting in a detriment to the organization’s message.
Judge Merriam noted that all three of the pro-life organizations in this case will have to meet the standard set in Slattery “separately and independently” of each other where the outcome may differ for each organization.
Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Christian employers are free to hire individuals who represent and convey the core principles of their organizations. The Second Circuit rightly reinstated this case so that these pro-life organizations have the chance to prove this New York law infringes on their expressive freedom to not employ or associate with those who do not align with their mission to protect preborn children.”
The post Pro-Life Groups Challenge New York Law Forcing Them to Hire Abortion Advocates appeared first on LifeNews.com.