Appeals Court Nixes Oregon Rule Forcing Adoptive Parents to Affirm Radical Transgender Ideology

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has nixed a state law requiring adoptive parents to promote the radical transgender ideology to their adopted children.

The state of Oregon had passed a law requiring that prospective foster parents must agree to “respect, accept, and support” adopted children who claim to be transgender or LGBTQ+ to be allowed to proceed with the adoption. It also barred strong adherence to religious beliefs that are “openly hostile or unsupportive” to transgender or LGBTQ+ children. 

Subsequently, a prospective foster parent, Jessica Bates, sued the state, assisted by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), arguing that the law excluded her from becoming a foster parent, based on her beliefs. 

She claimed that the law prevented her from adopting children because she could not lie to them, “that girls can be boys and vice versa,” and “could not agree to use inaccurate pronouns to refer to a child or to take children to pride parades.” 

The radical leftist law also required prospective adoptive parents to affirm “trans” kids’ adopted pronouns such as “Ze” and “Hir/Zir,” although the options were endless. 

They were also expected to foster an “LGBTQ-affirming environment” by displaying “hate-free zone” signs, such as rainbows, and providing resources, such as books and movies, that positively depict “same-gender relationships.”  They must also provide gender-affirming medical care upon request.

Introducing children to LGBTQ celebrities and role models who stood up for the community in the face of “stigma’ was also encouraged. These conditions were required, “whether or not a youth in your care openly identifies as LGBTQ+.” Talk about grooming 101.

In addition, religious faith and events that contradict the child’s chosen gender identity were also strictly prohibited.

“You do not have to choose between your faith and supporting their LGBTQ+ identity,” it stated.

However, in a 2-1 vote, the appellate court ruled that the law burdened Jessica’s rights to free speech and to practice her religion without discrimination. 

Trump appointee Judge Daniel Bress and Clinton-appointed Judge Michael Daly Hawkins voted in favor of nixing the radical Oregonian law, while Judge Richard Clifton, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, dissented.

“Strict scrutiny applies to Bates’s free speech claim because Oregon’s policy both restricts and compels speech based on content and viewpoint in the areas of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression,” the court ruled [pdf].

“Strict scrutiny applies to Bates’s free exercise claim because Oregon’s policy burdens Bates’s religious exercise and is neither neutral nor generally applicable.”

Writing for the majority, Judge Bress asserted that basic freedoms are guaranteed by the Constitution and that the government cannot force “adherence to state-favored orthodoxies.”

ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of Litigation Strategy Jonathan Scruggs said the radical Oregonian law bars viable parents from adopting children who deserve a loving home, because of their religious beliefs.

“Every child deserves a loving home, and children suffer when the government excludes people of faith from the adoption and foster system,” he said. “Because caregivers like Jessica cannot promote Oregon’s dangerous gender ideology to young kids and take them to events like pride parades, the state considers them to be unfit parents.”

“The 9th Circuit was right to remind Oregon that the foster and adoption system is supposed to serve the best interests of children, not the state’s ideological crusade.”