A Christian health care organization is claiming a new interpretation of Michigan’s anti-discrimination law as it relates to sexual orientation and gender identity “poses an imminent threat” to the group’s constitutional rights to freedom of religion, religious exercise, speech and assembly.
Christian Healthcare Centers filed a lawsuit Monday against the state of Michigan, arguing the state’s law violates due process because it imposes “vague standards” where the government is given “unbridled discretion” to censor speech.
The Grand Rapids, Michigan-area nonprofit organization says it serves everyone regardless of religion, race, sex, gender identity or sexual orientation, but will not participate in gender transitions or use pronouns inconsistent with an individual’s biological sex.
Christian Healthcare Centers also only hires employees who share its faith-based beliefs.
Those practices, the group said in a lawsuit filed in Michigan’s western U.S. District Court, are legal under federal and nearly all state laws, but forbidden under Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Law as interpreted recently by the Michigan Supreme Court.
“In effect, the law requires Christian Healthcare to check its religious faith at the clinic door — the very faith that motivates the clinic to open its doors to help those in need,” the group said in its suit filed against Attorney General Dana Nessel, Michigan Department of Civil Right Executive Director John Johnson Jr., and members of the Michigan Civil Rights Commission.
The organization is being represented by former solicitor general John Bursch, who is working for the conservative First Amendment legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom.
Nessel’s office on Monday said it had not yet been served the suit.
The suit comes in the wake of a July 28 Michigan Supreme Court order that found Michigan’s ban on discrimination based on sex included protections based on sexual orientation. An earlier Court of Appeals opinion said Michigan’s protections against sexual discrimination also encompassed gender identity, but Christian Healthcare said it waited until the Supreme Court ruled on the sexual identity question to “avoid piecemeal litigation.”
“Christian Healthcare realized that it faces a credible threat and substantial risk that it will be investigated and prosecuted under these laws for engaging in activities and speaking in accordance with its religious beliefs,” the group said in its lawsuit. “Specifically, Christian Healthcare faces such a risk under the laws’ regulation of employers, public accommodations and public services.”
The plaintiffs involved in the Michigan Supreme Court case — a Sturgis wedding venue and Marquette electrolysis business — also have claims pending challenging the law’s lack of protections for religious beliefs.
Christian Healthcare, founded in 2015, said it has already refused to use preferred pronouns or change a patient’s sex in medical records, and some of its current policies “violate Michigan’s law and subject it to immediate investigation and prosecution.”
Monday’s suit, the group argued, is a preemptive effort “to protect its right to operate as a religious ministry” as it hires new employees and maintains standards for its current employees.
“Ministries like Christian Healthcare should not have to choose between helping the hurting and following their faith,” the group said in its filing. “They can do both. The Constitution requires it. And Michigan is better off for it.”
Members of the health care organization pay a monthly fee for services — sometimes discounted or waived based on need — and must sign a membership agreement that includes a “Religious Provider Disclosure and Philosophy of Wellness and Healthcare.”
Members don’t need to affirm the statement of faith in the religious disclosure but are made to understand employees and services comport with the statement of faith, the group said in its suit. Employees also begin each day with prayer, have monthly corporate worship and Bible study and often pray with patients, the filing said.
“To fulfill its religious purpose, it is critical that Christian Healthcare hire employees who agree with, personally adhere to, agree to abide by, and can effectively communicate its religious beliefs,” the filing said.
About 18 of the group’s employees between September and December are expected to re-affirm their commitment to the religious statement, which includes the belief that marriage is between one man and one woman and that “biological sex is immutable.”
It clarifies that staff cannot participate in a gender transition treatment, use pronouns other than someone’s biological sex or participate in some activities such as sex outside marriage.
That statement and the group’s insistence that staff sign it could run afoul of the new interpretation of Michigan’s law, the lawsuit said.
“The ongoing and continual exposure to liability, investigation, and prosecution hinders the ability of Christian Healthcare to operate its organization, retain current employees, attract future employees, raise charitable donations, and make future plans for the organization,” the lawsuit said.
