Catholics want a choice

A new Illinois law prohibits discrimination against individuals based on their position on abortion, but Catholic Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield is challenging its constitutionality.

“States can’t force religious groups to violate their faith by affirming and accepting employees who violate their religious beliefs,” said Paprocki, who has made a name for himself as one of the nation’s most conservative Catholic leaders.

The Springfield diocese and the Pregnancy Care Center in Rockford jointly filed a federal lawsuit in the northern district of Illinois that contends the First Amendment allows religious organizations to determine their own criteria for whom they hire.

In a March 25 interview, Paprocki told Illinois Times, “The Diocese of Springfield is actively trying to hire someone who will lead their pro-life office. And the Pregnancy Care Center of Rockford is actively trying to recruit and hire someone right now who will counsel women in the seconds after they learn that they’re carrying new life.

“These positions are critical for having people who will advance their message and not contradict it.”

The Illinois Human Rights Act was amended Jan. 1 to include the reproductive rights provision.

Gov. JB Pritzker then said, “At a time when reproductive rights are under attack across the nation, Illinois is standing strong. This law makes it clear: no one should face discrimination for making personal decisions about their reproductive health. Whether it is fertility care or abortion, your choices are your own, and your rights are protected.”

But Paprocki contends the law violates the rights of religious organizations.

“What if somehow I hired a person who turned out to be pro-abortion?” he said. “Legally, I couldn’t fire that person. So, we have actually filed a lawsuit with the help of the Alliance for Defending Freedom. … It’s unfortunate that we have to go to court these days, but we’re hoping that the courts will protect our constitutional rights to freedom of expression and religious liberty.”

Mark Lippelmann is senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal advocacy group that works to expand Christian religious liberties and practices within public schools and in government.

Lippelmann told IT that while Illinois is not the first state to pass such a law, it remains an outlier.

“A couple states have done so – New York is one example,” he said. “That law was challenged and a court held that the state violated a religious organizations’ expressive association rights under the First Amendment. That case is ongoing. There’s another case out of St. Louis that reached the same result.”

Sarah Garza Resnick is president and CEO of Personal PAC, an Illinois pro-choice political action committee that advocates for reproductive health and rights and works to elect pro-choice candidates. 

She told IT in a written statement that the lawsuit lacked merit.

“This is a baseless lawsuit filed by Alliance Defending Freedom, a far-right law firm that aims to impose its religious ideology on people across the country. If, when, or how an employee decides to start a family is of no concern to their employer. We are hopeful Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul will prevail in court against these extremists.”

Drew Hill, a spokesperson for Raoul, said the lawsuit is being reviewed but declined to comment further because it is pending litigation.

Bob Gilligan, a lobbyist for the Catholic Conference of Illinois, said those lawmakers pushing the legislation were unwilling to create an exemption for religious institutions.

Lippelmann said constitutional concerns were raised during legislative debate.

“Some legislators raised the expressive association and First Amendment rights of religious organizations, including pregnancy centers like the one that we represent, in this case. … and said this is going to be a problem,” he said.

Lippelmann said the legislation’s sponsors did not directly respond to those concerns.

“(They) want to be a leader in protecting what they deem to be bodily autonomy and their right to have an abortion,” he said.

IT reached out to multiple sponsors and co-sponsors of the legislation. None responded to phone calls or texts.

However, when Pritzker signed the measure in August, House sponsor state Rep. Anna Moeller, D-Elgin, issued this statement, “It is unacceptable that anyone can be discriminated against in employment, housing, or public accommodations based on their reproductive health decisions. This gap in our anti-discrimination laws needed to be addressed, and we have taken action to do so.

“While other states continue to impose increasing restrictions on women seeking essential reproductive services, Illinois is taking a more compassionate approach. The future of our state hinges on safeguarding women’s health care rights, and this law is a critical part of that commitment.”

Paprocki, who has a law degree and taught at the University of Notre Dame’s law school, said he is confident that the lawsuit will prevail.

Lippelmann added, “It’s almost like asking PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) to hire someone who doesn’t care about animals.”

This article appears in Young offenders in Illinois still serving life sentences.