The 3 - June 21, 2020

This week's edition of The 3 features a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court that opens up the language of civil rights law to include sexual orientation and gender identity.  Also, the U.S. Department of Justice is calling for even-handed enforcement of COVID-19 restrictions on social distancing.  And, there is an encouraging story out of a Federal appeals court upholding a Missouri pro-life law.

U.S. Supreme Court redefines the word, "sex" in civil rights law to include sexual orientation and gender identity

In a dramatic 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court, responding to three cases that had been combined, redefined the word, "sex" in Title VII in the 1964 Civil Rights Law to include "sexual orientation" and "gender identity."

Alliance Defending Freedom represented the plaintiff, a funeral home, in one of the cases, involving a male employee who had decided to dress as a woman in greeting guests.  The employee was fired and filed a lawsuit.  ADF, on its website, stated:

The EEOC and the American Civil Liberties Union claimed the funeral home’s decision violated Title VII—a federal law intended to ensure equal opportunities in employment regardless of a person’s race, color, religion, national origin, or sex—by redefining the word “sex” to include gender identity. The Supreme Court concluded that courts and the government may redefine that term in Title VII, even though Congress clearly did not intend that meaning when it wrote the law and is the only body with the constitutional authority to change it.

ADF Vice President of Appellate Advocacy John Bursch stated, "Redefining ‘sex’ to mean ‘gender identity’ will create chaos and enormous unfairness for women and girls in athletics, women’s shelters, and many other contexts. Civil rights laws that use the word ‘sex’ were put in place to protect equal opportunities for women. Allowing a court or government bureaucrats to redefine a term with such a clear and important meaning undermines those very opportunities—the ones the law was designed to protect.”

Family Research Council, on its website, included this quote from its President, Tony Perkins:

"The core issue before the Court in this case was whether it is within the legitimate power of judges to suddenly redefine the meaning of words and rewrite a 55-year-old statute. Sadly, the Court answered in the affirmative.

"Allowing judges to rewrite the Civil Rights Act to add gender identity and sexual orientation as protected classes poses a grave threat to religious liberty. We've already witnessed in recent years how courts have used the redefinition of words as a battering ram to crush faith-based businesses and organizations...

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion in the case.

U.S. Department of Justice urges even-handed enforcement of COVID-19 restrictions

While churches are continuing to reopen during this pandemic and finding some states continuing to place narrow restrictions on these congregations, hundreds and thousands are gathering throughout the nation to protest in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd.  While public, peaceful protesting is generally regarded as an expression of free speech, churches could readily see that their free speech opportunities and freedom of religious expression are being unfairly curtailed.

ChristianHeadlines.com reported:

The Trump Justice Department is pressuring Washington Gov. Jon [sic] Inslee to loosen restrictions on churches by arguing the state’s policy of allowing unlimited peaceful protests while capping houses of worship is discriminatory and likely unconstitutional.

The Department of Justice, in a June 11 Statement of Interest in a Tacoma, Wash., federal court supporting a Washington state church, argues “imposing a hard cap on all religious worship and no cap on secular gatherings constitutes unequal treatment.”

State law had capped outdoor church services at 100 people, regardless of precautions, such as social distancing.  Indoor church services were limited to 25 percent of capacity, with a 50-person limit. The article also says:

U.S. Attorney Brian T. Moran of the Western District of Washington said the “ability to gather to express one’s faith and seek comfort is a fundamental right.”

“Just as we have seen peaceful protestors gathered together and exercising their First Amendment rights, so too must we protect the right of religious institutions such as churches, mosques and temples to gather together and express their faith,” Moran said in a statement.  

On Thursday, Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington announced a relaxation of restrictions on church, according to FoxNews.com, which said:

During the new stage, places of worship can accommodate up to 50 percent their normal capacity or up to 400 people, whichever is less, Inslee’s office said Thursday.

This is only for counties qualifying to move into Stage 3 of the reopening process.

Federal court upholds MO pro-life law, concept that life begins at conception

A pro-life law in Missouri providing for informed consent for a woman considering an abortion has been upheld in a Federal appeals court, the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

LifeNews.com reports:

The case — a victory for pro-life advocates, unborn babies and mothers — involves a Missouri informed consent law and a challenge by “Judy Doe,” a member of the Satanic Temple. Doe claimed the law violated her religious freedom because she does not believe that “the life of each human being begins at conception.”

The article relates that the court said, "… a state is free to use ‘its voice … to show its profound respect for’ life...," language that the article says was taken from a U.S. Supreme Court decision.