File Photo Republican Attorney General Patrick Morrisey said he was pleased with a recent US Supreme Court ruling on religious freedom.
CHARLESTON – Republican Attorney General Patrick Morrisey suffered defeat in one case in the US Supreme Court on Thursday but won another while preparing to defend two new state laws.
West Virginia was one of several states involved in the Fulton v City of Philadelphia federal lawsuit in which a Catholic adoption agency sued Philadelphia over a city ordinance requiring the agency to screen same-sex couples expressing interest in adoption services.
In a unanimous decision published on Thursday, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of Catholic social services. The judges opposed the city’s 2018 decision to stop referring families to Catholic social services due to the city’s anti-discrimination ordinances.
The agency agreed to admit LGBTQ people as adoptive parents and adopt children who identify as LGBTQ. Chief Justice John Roberts, who drafted the majority opinion, found that the city’s policies violated the agency’s constitutional right to religious freedom under the First Amendment. West Virginia filed a lawsuit in support of the Catholic Social Service.
“This is a great victory for the First Amendment as the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the government must not discriminate against Catholic Social Services based on their religious beliefs.” said Morrisey. “This is really a great benefit for the free practice of religion.”
Morrisey’s Fulton vs. City of Philadelphia win came shortly after Morrisey’s loss on Thursday in the US Supreme Court in California vs. Texas. In a 7-2 decision, the US Supreme Court ruled against Morrisey and 17 other Republican attorneys general and two private individuals in an effort to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. A majority of the judges ruled that the attorneys general had no authority to bring the case in the first place.
The attorney general also announced its intention to defend two state laws that are being challenged in state and federal courts.
Kanawha County district judge Tera Salango on Tuesday issued an injunction on behalf of the West Virginia AFL-CIO and 11 other unions to block the implementation of the 2009 House Bill, the Paycheck Protection Act. The unions filed a lawsuit against HB 2009 last month regarding restrictions on employers’ and workers’ organizations’ use of wages and agency fees in political activities.
The law, which would have come into effect Thursday, prohibits employers and employment agencies from withholding any part of a worker’s wages for political activities on behalf of a union or other private organization without the employee’s express written consent. The bill also prohibits state, county, and county governments from withholding union or club dues from the wages or salaries of a public employee.
Morrisey said the state will appeal Salango’s stay, which is blocking implementation of the Paycheck Protection Act.
“Nothing in this law discriminates against trade unions” said Morrisey. Instead, it simply removes the burden of government deductions from wages that benefit voluntary organizations such as trade unions, labor organizations and associations, while deductions are made for benefits offered to all workers based on their employment, such as employee benefits. B. pensions, tax retention, insurance benefits and others are retained. “
Morrisey also said the state will intervene in a case filed last month by Lambda Legal, the state and national associations of the American Civil Liberties Union, and the law firm Cooley LLP against the state against Bill 3293 regarding the participation of transgender people. Students were submitted to interschool sporting events.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, was filed on behalf of an 11-year-old transgender girl planning to try her hand at her middle school cross-country team. HB 3293 requires athletic students in middle school, high school, or college to participate in sports that are appropriate to their biological gender, based on the gender of the student at the time of their birth.
“There are good reasons for our office to intervene. First and foremost is the constitutional duty of the Attorney General to protect the interests of the state. “ said Morrisey. “Fair competition and the preservation of women’s sport are of the utmost importance. Defending this law will also preserve the many opportunities that Title IX has opened up to girls and women everywhere. “
Defending HB 3293 could become more difficult as President Joe Biden’s administration reverses previous interpretations of Title IX. The Department of Education announced this week that Title IX protection will be extended to transgender students, which prohibits gender-based discrimination. The Justice Department also filed a brief in the case of a transgender student athlete in the state who sided with Lambda Legal.
The state claims that HB 3293 will protect athletic opportunities for girls“Wrote US Attorney General Fred Westfall Jr.”Neither the facts nor the law support this claim. Of course, there are still significant barriers to full equality for female students in athletics. But transgender girls, who make up “about half a percent” of the population of the United States, are not one of them. “
Get the latest news and more in your inbox