Oregon officials back off ‘gender ideology mandate’ for mom seeking to adopt
Oregon Department of Human Services settled a lawsuit with Jessica Bates, agreeing not to disqualify her from adoption based on her Christian beliefs about gender and sexuality. The settlement bars the state from considering Bates’ religious views or requiring her to use language that conflicts with those beliefs when evaluating her application for a child‑placement certification. The case stemmed from a 2022 denial that cited a “gender ideology mandate” requiring applicants to affirm support for all gender identities and expressions. The ruling follows an appellate decision that found the policy likely violated Bates’ First Amendment rights, leading to a legal battle lasting over three years.
14 days ago
Oregon officials have agreed not to categorically exclude Jessica Bates from adopting or fostering children because of her Christian beliefs about marriage, gender, and sexuality. The settlement resolves a three-and-a-half-year legal dispute over the state’s foster-care certification requirements.
In September 2022, the Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) denied Bates’ application after she declined to agree that she would “respect, accept and support” a child’s sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. The Alliance Defending Freedom characterized that requirement as a “gender ideology mandate.”
Bates told the certification officer that she would love any child placed in her care but would not facilitate gender-transition treatment, use pronouns inconsistent with a child’s biological sex, or encourage gender expression inconsistent with the child’s biological sex or same-sex attraction. She sued ODHS in March 2023, alleging violations of her First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion.
A federal district court initially ruled for ODHS in December 2023. In July 2025, however, an appellate panel concluded that Bates was likely to prevail on her constitutional claims and barred the department from enforcing the disputed rules against her while the case continued.
Under the Sept. 9 agreement, ODHS must allow Bates to apply for certification and may not consider her religious views in evaluating her application. The department may not deny her application because she believes sexual activity belongs within marriage between one man and one woman or that people should identify and live consistently with their biological sex.
The agreement also protects Bates’ ability to speak about, practice, parent, and make ordinary caregiving decisions consistent with those beliefs. ODHS may not require her to use prescribed language, including pronouns, that conflicts with her religious convictions as a condition of certification.
The settlement prohibits the department from applying a categorical rule that prevents Bates from being considered for a particular placement because of her religious beliefs. It also bars ODHS from disqualifying her from consideration for a specific child on that basis.
The settlement does not require ODHS to place a child with Bates. The department may still make individualized placement decisions based on a child’s needs and on a prospective foster parent’s concerns or limitations—including religiously motivated limitations—in meeting those needs.
Those considerations may include a child’s sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression, according to the agreement.
ADF Senior Counsel Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse said the settlement protects religious freedom and allows Bates to pursue adoption without being excluded because of her beliefs. He also said the agreement serves children by expanding the pool of potential foster and adoptive parents.
The Oregon attorney general’s office referred requests for comment to ODHS, which did not respond to the article’s request.
Does the Church affirm First Amendment protection for religious adoption applicants?
Yes—in principle, the Church affirms that religious adoption applicants should not be forced to violate their sincerely held beliefs, and that faith-based adoption agencies should be protected from religious discrimination.
The USCCB teaches that religious freedom includes immunity from coercion to act contrary to one’s beliefs, publicly or privately. It also states that child-welfare providers should be able to place children consistently with their religious convictions and that adoptive and foster parents should be able to choose agencies sharing their beliefs.
However, the Church does not treat religious freedom as an unlimited entitlement to adopt. The child’s welfare is paramount, and Catholic teaching holds that children ordinarily have a right to placement with a married man and woman, or at least in a setting that does not contradict the meaning of marriage.
Thus, the Catholic position supports First Amendment protection for religious adoption applicants and agencies against coercion or exclusion because of their faith, while recognizing legitimate child-welfare requirements. The supplied documents express this Catholic and constitutional principle, but they do not themselves settle every particular First Amendment case or guarantee a specific applicant’s approval.