Foster families to ACLU: don’t take away kids’ chance at a new home

New lawsuit would make it harder for thousands of children currently in foster care to find permanent homes

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Shamber Flore and several adoptive families are going to court in Michigan today to stand up for vulnerable foster children. In Dumont v. Lyon, the ACLU is trying to force religious adoption agencies to close down their foster and adoption programs, making it even harder for thousands of foster kids to find permanent homes. If successful, the ACLU’s lawsuit would especially harm minority and special needs kids.        Every year in Michigan, over 600 youth “age out” of foster care, which means that at the age of 18 they officially leave the foster system never having found a permanent family. This number is on the rise, and a recent study showed that these youth—mostly African American—are particularly vulnerable to ending up in poverty, without an education, and back on the streets. That’s where religious adoption agencies like St. Vincent Catholic Charities come in.   “I don’t understand why the ACLU is trying to take away hope from children who were once like me—victims of abuse exposed to drugs, prostitution, and neglect,” said Shamber Flore, who was adopted as a foster child in 2005. “My family would not have adopted me without the help of St. Vincent. We need more agencies like this finding more homes for kids—not less.”   Last year, St. Vincent recruited more new foster families than almost every other agency in its service area. Religious adoption agencies like St. Vincent are important in this work because they can reach families from different segments of the population that would not otherwise adopt or foster. They are also particularly successful at placing large sibling groups and providing support to families with medically fragile kids. And the majority of kids in St. Vincent’s care are minority and special needs children.   But in September 2017, the ACLU sued trying to make it illegal for the state of Michigan to partner with religious adoption agencies simply because of their religious beliefs.   “The ACLU’s lawsuit is not at all about protecting children. It’s about scoring cheap political points at the expense of children,” said Stephanie Barclay, counsel at Becket. “Thankfully, the constitution prohibits that result.”     Becket is representing Shamber Flore, Melissa and Chad Buck, and St. Vincent Catholic Charities. Becket will file today to intervene in the Eastern District of Michigan to defend the right of families and religious adoption agencies to keep serving Michigan’s most vulnerable children.     Additional Information:                                                 Motion to Intervene will be available here (December 18, 2017) Case page for Dumont v. Lyon (all legal docs, press releases and background) Media Kit  (Images, b-roll, graphics. Credit: Becket)

Penn. AG Shapiro: Little Sisters unwelcome in City of Brotherly Love

Little Sisters of the Poor and supporters gathered outside Philadelphia court while hearing inside decides their fate

WASHINGTON, D.C. – This morning, the Little Sisters of the Poor waited outside a Philadelphia courthouse while a hearing inside decided their fate. Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro is suing the federal government to take away the Sisters’ religious exemption from the HHS contraceptive mandate. Shapiro says that the Little Sisters and others who would be affected if he wins have no say in court over what happens to their rights. Today supporters gathered outside the Philadelphia court to support the Little Sisters in this case, where Mother Loraine Marie Maguire addressed the crowd.   In early October, HHS issued a new rule that protects the Little Sisters of the Poor and other religious non-profits from providing services in their healthcare plans that violate their faith like the week-after pill. The Little Sisters’ four-year legal ordeal seemed close to an end but now Pennsylvania’s lawsuit is threatening the Sisters’ rights again. Just last week, Pennsylvania obtained a court order keeping the Little Sisters from joining the case to defend their hard-won rights. Becket immediately appealed that order to the Third Circuit.   “We are hopeful that the court will rule as the Supreme Court ruled, that the government doesn’t need us to do its work. As Little Sisters of the Poor, all we want is to follow our calling to love and to serve and finally put this legal ordeal behind us,” said Mother Loraine Marie Maguire, mother provincial of the Little Sister of the Poor.   Represented by Becket, the Little Sisters spent the last four years battling the HHS mandate (learn more about the Little Sisters here). Following an earlier ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, in October HHS finally admitted that it had been wrong to fight the Little Sisters of the Poor.   “After the Little Sisters’ four-year fight, a Supreme Court victory, and a new rule that protects women like them, Attorney General Shapiro still went to court to take away their rights. He then argued that the Little Sisters shouldn’t even be allowed to come to this court today to make their case,” said Lori Windham, senior counsel at Becket, which is representing the Little Sisters of the Poor. “Josh Shapiro left the Little Sisters of the Poor out in the cold – in the City of Brotherly Love.”   Oral argument took place in federal district court in Philadelphia to decide if the protection for the Little Sisters will stand. A similar hearing took place on Tuesday in Oakland, California where supporters rallied outside the courthouse in support of the Little Sisters.                                                       Additional Information:        Rally Statements: Twitter Live  Little Sisters’ Motion to Intervene (November 22, 2017) Media Kit for press use (images, b-roll, graphics. Credit: Becket) Chart of state contraceptive mandate coverage (Credit: Kaiser) New HHS Interim Rule Case Page for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Hargan (press releases, legal docs, news, images) Website: www.thelittlesistersofthepoor.com    ###   Becket is a non-profit, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions and has a 100% win-rate before the United States Supreme Court. For over 20 years, it has successfully defended clients of all faiths, including Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Native Americans, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians (read more here).

Atheists abandon crusade against sermons ... again!

FFRF runs away from its own lawsuit to force Trump to censor sermons WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last night, and for the second time in a row, a group of pastors defeated a lawsuit by militant atheists that demanded the IRS control the internal religious teachings of houses of worship. The atheists—Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF)—dismissed their own lawsuit, giving up before the court had a chance to rule against them. FFRF’s dismissal in FFRF v. Trump comes just three years after it did the same thing in their identical lawsuit, FFRF v. Koskinen. Both times, FFRF ran away after religious leaders intervened to defend their rights. By law, because this is now the second time that FFRF has given up on the same claim, FFRF’s dismissal means they have lost on the merits—and the pastors have permanently fended off FFRF. The following statement can be attributed to Daniel Blomberg, counsel at Becket:  “FFRF is running away again, and this time for good—in federal court, you don’t get a third bite at the apple. Which is great news for pastors, priests, rabbis, and imams who want to preach their faith without IRS censorship. The pulpit is one place where a little more separation of church and state would go a long way.”  Additional Information:                                                                       FFRF’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (December 13, 2017) Case Page for FFRF v. Trump (press releases, legal documents, news, images) ###  Becket is a non-profit, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions. For over 20 years, it has defended clients of all faiths, including Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Native Americans, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians (read more).

Democrats war against the Little Sisters of the Poor?

Two recent press releases from The Becket Fund raise the question: Why are the Democrats still trying to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide contraception and abortions, and abortion inducing drugs to their employees? What does this say about the Democratic Party?

Here are the two press releases:

FIRST: The Little Sisters of the Poor and their hard-fought rights will be on trial Thursday, December 14, but the Sisters will be outside the courthouse because of Pennsylvania’s Democratic Attorney General Josh Shapiro’s attempt to silence them. Shapiro is suing to take away the Sisters’ religious exemption from a Health and Human Services rule. In early October, HHS issued a new rule that protects the Little Sisters of the Poor and other religious non-profits from providing services in their health care plan that violate their faith like the week-after pill. The Little Sisters’ four-year legal ordeal was close to an end, but now the state of Pennsylvania is suing HHS to take away the Little Sisters’ religious exemption. Worse yet, Pennsylvania successfully won a court order keeping the Little Sisters from joining the case to defend their rights. A similar hearing took place on Tuesday in Oakland, California where nearly 50 people rallied outside the courthouse in support of the Little Sisters. Represented by Becket, the Little Sisters will speak up outside the courthouse to ensure that they can continue their vital ministry of caring for the elderly poor, as they have for over 175 years, without violating their faith (learn more about the Little Sisters here).

***

SECOND: The Little Sisters of the Poor were back in court to defend themselves against a lawsuit by California’s Democratic Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who is suing to take away the Little Sisters’ religious exemption from a Health and Human Services rule. Becerra has argued that the Little Sisters shouldn’t be able to defend their rights in this lawsuit. Before the hearing, nearly fifty people attended a rally outside the Oakland court in support of the Little Sisters. 

In early October, HHS issued a new rule that protects religious non-profits like the Little Sisters of the Poor from providing services that violate their faith like the week-after pill. This meant their four-year legal ordeal was close to an end, yet shortly after, the state of California sued to take away the Little Sisters’ religious exemption. Represented by Becket, the Little Sisters went back to court to ensure that they can continue their vital ministry of caring for the elderly poor without violating their faith. 

“We pray that soon this trying time will be over; that the court will rule as the Supreme Court ruled last year saying the government doesn’t need us to provide these services to women. As Little Sisters of the Poor, all we want is to follow our calling of serving the elderly poor,” said Mother Maria Christine of the Little Sisters of the Poor (watch her full statement here.)  

The Little Sisters spent the last four years battling the HHS mandate that would have forced them to either violate their faith by providing services like the week-after pill in their healthcare plan, or pay millions in fines. Following an earlier ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, in October HHS admitted that it had been wrong to fight the Little Sisters and issued a new rule that finally exempts them and other religious non-profits. The government had long exempted big businesses—such as Exxon, Chevron and Pepsi—and even its own health care plans. California never sued the Obama administration for creating these exemptions that reach tens of millions more people than the Little Sisters’ exemption.   

“Women like the Little Sisters of the Poor do not need more bureaucrats pushing them around. They should be allowed their day in court to argue for their rights, and they should be allowed to practice their faith in peace,” said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters of the Poor.  

Oral argument took place in federal district court in Oakland, California to decide if the protection for the Little Sisters will stand, and whether the Little Sisters will be allowed to defend it in this court. A decision is likely by the end of the year.  

### 

 Becket is a non-profit, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions and has a 100% win-rate before the United States Supreme Court. For over 20 years, it has successfully defended clients of all faiths, including Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Native Americans, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians (read more here).