Jonathan Ernst/Reuters
The United States Supreme Court building is seen on a sunny day in Washington, June 17, 2021. In recent years, the Supreme Court has sent mixed messages on the conflict between LGBTQ and religious rights.

In LGBTQ foster care case, Supreme Court backs religious rights

On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously to embrace religious rights over LGBTQ rights in favor of Catholic Social Services. The organization refuses to place children in foster care with same-sex couples. 

The United States Supreme Court embraced religious rights over LGBTQ rights on Thursday by ruling in favor of a Catholic Church-affiliated agency that sued after Philadelphia refused to place children for foster care with the organization because it barred same-sex couples from applying to become foster parents.

The 9-0 ruling, written by conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, was a victory for Catholic Social Services, part of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. The court said that the city’s refusal to use the Catholic agency for foster care services unless it agreed to certify same-sex couples violates the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee of the free exercise of religion.

Catholic Social Services (CSS) argued that Philadelphia had penalized it for its religious views and for following church teachings on marriage. The court did not rule on some of the broader legal questions raised by religious rights advocates.

In the ruling, Mr. Roberts wrote, “CSS seeks only an accommodation that will allow it to continue serving the children of Philadelphia in a manner consistent with its religious beliefs; it does not seek to impose those beliefs on anyone else.”

The case, argued before the court in November, pitted LGBTQ rights against religious rights. It was one of the first major cases that former President Donald Trump’s third appointee to the court, Amy Coney Barrett, participated in after being confirmed by the U.S. Senate in October.

The Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019 ruled against Catholic Social Services, saying it had not shown that Philadelphia had treated it differently because of its religious affiliation. U.S. District Judge Petrese Tucker in Philadelphia in 2018 also ruled against the organization, finding that the city’s anti-discrimination measures were applied uniformly, meaning the group’s religious rights were not violated and it was not entitled to an exemption.

Catholic Social Services, which has helped provide foster care services for more than a century, had said it would be compelled to close its foster care operations if it was unable to participate in Philadelphia’s program.

Philadelphia in 2018 suspended foster care referrals to Catholic Social Services, which then sued alongside three foster parents.

Eleven of the 50 states currently allow private agencies to refuse to place children with same-sex couples, according to the Movement Advancement Project, a group backing gay rights.

Philadelphia in 2018 suspended foster care referrals to Catholic Social Services after a newspaper report about the organization’s policy of turning away same-sex couples seeking to serve as foster parents. The organization had a contract with the city for the placement of foster children. It said the city’s action meant that available foster homes were sitting empty amid a foster care crisis in the city of about 1.5 million people.

The Supreme Court in recent years has sent mixed messages on the conflict between LGBTQ and religious rights.

It backed gay rights in a series of landmark rulings including a 2015 decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide and a June 2020 ruling that a federal law barring workplace discrimination protects gay and transgender employees.

The court also bolstered religious rights in several decisions, including a 2014 ruling that allowed owners of businesses to raise religious objections against the government.

This story was reported by Reuters. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to In LGBTQ foster care case, Supreme Court backs religious rights
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today