A judge tells federal agencies they can't enforce anti-trans bias policies against Catholic groups
The ruling from U.S. District Judge Peter Welte, the chief federal judge in North Dakota, bars the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services from enforcing a health care rule it imposed in 2024 under Democratic President Joe Biden. The rule said that existing policies against sex discrimination covered discrimination based on gender identity, so that health care providers risked losing federal funds if they refused to provide gender-affirming care.
Welte also barred the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from telling employers that a failure to have health plans cover gender-affirming care for their workers would represent discrimination based on sex that could lead to a lawsuit against them and penalties.
The judge rejected a request from an order of nuns, two Catholic homes and the Catholic Benefits Association, which represents employers, to impose similar bans on each agency covering abortion and fertility treatments Catholic organizations consider immoral. He said those claims were 'underdeveloped' and not ready for court review.
But he concluded that allowing the two agencies to enforce policies on gender-affirming care or health coverage for it would restrict employers' and health care providers' ability to live out their religious beliefs, violating a 1992 federal law meant to provide broad protections for religious freedoms. The HHS rule had a provision allowing the agency to make case-by-case exceptions based on religious beliefs, but Welte said that would be insufficient.
'The case-by-case exemption procedure leaves religious organizations unable to predict their legal exposure without furthering any compelling antidiscrimination interests,' wrote Welte, who is based in Fargo.
The group, founded in 2013, says it 'advocates for and litigates in defense of our members' First Amendment rights to provide employee benefits and a work environment that is consistent with the Catholic faith.' The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects religious freedoms.
Association General Counsel Martin Nussbaum welcomed the ruling, saying the organization's members 'want to do the right thing in their health plan and in their medical services that they provide for those medical providers, and this gives them protection to doing that.'
And he said the judge's ruling suggests there are no mandates from the federal government on abortion or fertility treatments, so there is 'no need to provide protection.'
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that the Civil Rights Act's protections against discrimination based on sex also cover anti-LGBTQ+ bias in employment. The landmark 1964 act doesn't have specific provisions dealing with bias based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
But courts also have intervened to limit how far the federal government can go in combating anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination when religious organizations or employers with religious beliefs against LGBTQ+ rights are involved.
Both the HHS rule and the EEOC's policy on sex discrimination have their roots in efforts by President Barack Obama to protect LGBTQ+ rights in 2016, in his last year in office.
When President Donald Trump began his second term in January, he issued an order saying the federal government would not recognize transgender people's gender identities. In April, two employees said the EEOC was classifying all new gender identity-related discrimination cases as its lowest priority, essentially putting them on indefinite hold.
The 2024 HHS rule also covered bias based on 'pregnancy or related conditions," and the Catholic health care providers argued that they might face losing federal funds if they refused to perform abortions, in line with Catholic opposition to abortion. But HHS said the rule wouldn't have forced them to perform abortions or provide health coverage for abortions — only that it couldn't refuse to care for someone because they'd had one, according to Welte.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
a few seconds ago
- Associated Press
Bolivia will choose a new president but environmental activists see little hope of progress
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — Bolivia's upcoming presidential election will mark a shift from nearly two decades of socialist rule, but many Indigenous and environmental leaders doubt it will bring progress in stopping deforestation, fires or pollution in the Amazon. The Oct. 19 runoff pits centrist Sen. Rodrigo Paz against right-wing former president Jorge 'Tuto' Quiroga — two contenders promising change but rooted in an economic model critics say has long fueled environmental damage in one of South America's most biodiverse nations. The Amazon spans nine countries and plays a crucial role in absorbing carbon and regulating climate patterns worldwide. Approximately 8% of the Amazon is in Bolivia. Scientists warn that deforestation is pushing parts of the forest toward a tipping point where it could shift into savanna. The election feels like a choice between two threats, according to Ruth Alipaz Cuqui, coordinator of the Indigenous alliance CONTIOCAP and a member of the Uchupiamona community. She said governments of all stripes have ignored Indigenous well-being. 'Agreements are signed, commitments are made, laws and decrees are passed, but in the territory there is absolutely nothing applied,' she said. Quiroga's campaign told The Associated Press he would tighten controls on forest fires, promote sustainable agriculture, expand biofuel production, and encourage reforestation to curb high deforestation rates. He also calls for using carbon and green bonds — tools to raise money to fund conservation efforts. Paz's team did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Environment has paid a price for economic policies Evo Morales — Bolivia's first Indigenous president — often invoked Pachamama, the Indigenous concept of Mother Earth as a living being that sustains life, and rose to power by championing Indigenous rights and environmental protection. But his socialist governments also expanded exports of soy, beef, gas and minerals to fund social programs. And his administration allied with agribusiness and ranching elites, loosened land-clearing restrictions and promoted infrastructure projects that opened new frontiers in the Amazon. Bolivia is one of the Amazon basin's fastest-deforesting countries. Forest loss spiked in 2019, when Morales eased burning rules and legalized agricultural clearing, fueling massive wildfires that wiped out nearly a million hectares (about 3,860 square miles). The destruction has continued as cattle ranching, soy farming, logging and mining push deeper into Indigenous lands. In 2024, fires scorched more than 10 million hectares — about 38,600 square miles, or roughly the size of Iceland — and Bolivia recorded the world's second-highest tropical primary forest loss after Brazil, according to Global Forest Watch. Vincent Vos, a Dutch-Bolivian researcher based in the Amazonian department of Beni, said communities are confronting overlapping crises. 'Santa Cruz has already lost 68% of their water reserves… we've got 30% less rainfall than a decade ago,' he said. 'Our fish is really completely contaminated by mercury already and people are really suffering from high levels of mercury poisoning.' Campaign hasn't centered on environmental issues While environmental issues have not been a central focus of the campaign, both candidates have outlined some proposals. Paz has proposed a $15 billion 'green government' funded by carbon credits, which can be generated from projects like forest-planting that aim to reduce emissions; tighter controls on agricultural burns and a crackdown on illegal gold mining. Quiroga vows to make Bolivia a leader in decarbonization, protect parks, restore fire-hit ecosystems, and expand agriculture 'appropriately' — a stance critics warn could still spur deforestation. Nick Fromherz, a Bolivian-based adjunct professor at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland who specializes in Latin American environmental law, said both candidates have spoken broadly about fighting wildfires and managing the agricultural frontier. But they've offered few solutions to less visible crises like mercury contamination from gold mining, he said. Mercury, widely used in gold mining, flows into rivers and contaminates fish, a dietary staple for Amazonian communities. Studies have found alarmingly high mercury levels in people living along Bolivian rivers, echoing concerns across the Amazon basin. For Stasiek Czaplicki, a Bolivian environmental economist who has studied forest policies, the danger lies not only in policy direction but in the state's ability to enforce protections. He said Quiroga 'would be worst for the institutions that defend the environment.' He cited proposals to end collective Indigenous land titles — opening them to private sales — and to expand soy and cattle production in the east. Critics warn those moves would accelerate deforestation and weaken agencies tasked with curbing it. Local costs, global consequences Fromherz said environmental concerns are still viewed as secondary in Bolivia's politics, even as they shape the lives of millions. For Vos, the gap between rhetoric and reality is measured in disappearing rivers, vanishing fish and poisoned communities. 'People are really suffering,' Vos said. Alipaz says years of unmet commitments have left the Amazon´s communities doubtful that the election will bring significant change. 'What happens to us is that we are stripped of our territory, poisoned with smoke and mercury, and also deprived of the means of life such as water, soil, and food,' Alipaz said. 'The life of Indigenous peoples in Bolivia has gone from bad to worse. We will continue defending. It's not just our lives, it is our very existence that is at stake.' ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Newsweek
a few seconds ago
- Newsweek
Barack Obama Reacts to Gavin Newsom's Redistricting Play
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Former Democratic President Barack Obama has weighed in on the rare mid-decade redistricting battles unfolding in several states, voicing support for California Gov. Gavin Newsom's cautious approach to revising congressional maps. Obama's comments came as Republican-led efforts in Texas, encouraged by President Donald Trump, aim to strengthen GOP control ahead of next year's elections. "I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach," Obama said Tuesday during a fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, according to excerpts obtained by The Associated Press. "He said this is going to be responsible. We're not going to try to completely maximize it. We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect." This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.
a few seconds ago
Obama applauds Newsom's California redistricting plan as 'responsible'
Former President Barack Obama has waded into states' efforts at rare mid-decade redistricting efforts, saying he agrees with California Gov. Gavin Newsom's response to alter his state's congressional maps, in the way of Texas redistricting efforts promoted by President Donald Trump aimed at shoring up Republicans' position in next year's elections. 'I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach. He said this is going to be responsible. We're not going to try to completely maximize it,' Obama said at a Tuesday fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, according to excerpts obtained by The Associated Press. 'We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect.' While noting that 'political gerrymandering' is not his 'preference,' Obama said that, if Democrats 'don't respond effectively, then this White House and Republican-controlled state governments all across the country, they will not stop, because they do not appear to believe in this idea of an inclusive, expansive democracy.' According to organizers, the event raised $2 million for the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, one of which has filed and supported litigation in several states over GOP-drawn districts. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Eric Holder, who served as Obama's attorney general and heads up the group, also appeared. The former president's comments come as Texas lawmakers return to Austin this week, renewing a heated debate over a new congressional map creating five new potential GOP seats. The plan is the result of prodding by President Donald Trump, eager to stave off a midterm defeat that would deprive his party of control of the House of Representatives. Texas Democratic lawmakers delayed a vote for 15 days by leaving the state in protest, depriving the House of enough members to do business. Spurred on by the Texas situation, Democratic governors including Newsom have pondered ways to possibly strengthen their party's position by way of redrawing U.S. House district lines, five years out from the Census count that typically leads into such procedures. In California — where voters in 2010 gave the power to draw congressional maps to an independent commission, with the goal of making the process less partisan — Democrats have unveiled a proposal that could give that state's dominant political party an additional five U.S. House seats in a bid to win the fight to control of Congress next year. If approved by voters in November, the blueprint could nearly erase Republican House members in the nation's most populous state, with Democrats intending to win the party 48 of its 52 U.S. House seats, up from 43. A hearing over that measure devolved into a shouting match Tuesday as a Republican lawmaker clashed with Democrats, and a committee voted along party lines to advance the new congressional map. California Democrats do not need any Republican votes to move ahead, and legislators are expected to approve a proposed congressional map and declare a Nov. 4 special election by Thursday to get required voter approval. Newsom and Democratic leaders say they'll ask voters to approve their new maps only for the next few elections, returning map-drawing power to the commission following the 2030 census — and only if a Republican state moves forward with new maps. Obama applauded that temporary timeline. 'And we're going to do it in a temporary basis because we're keeping our eye on where we want to be long term,' Obama said, referencing Newsom's take on the California plan. 'I think that approach is a smart, measured approach, designed to address a very particular problem in a very particular moment in time.'
