Clergy challenge Missouri's abortion ban in court on basis of religious freedom
Thirteen clergy from six different faiths are challenging Missouri's abortion ban on the basis of religious freedom. The lawsuit against the State of Missouri was announced this morning at Christ Church Cathedral in St. Louis, ahead of what would have been the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.
The clergy are asking the Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis for a permanent injunction striking down the abortion law.
On June 24, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, paving the way for states to enact their own laws regarding abortion. Minutes after the high court's decision, Missouri's "trigger law" went into effect, banning abortions except in the case of a "medical emergency."
Who is doing this?
Thirteen Missouri clergy members from six different faiths are being represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU), an organization that aims to ensure "religion does not dictate public policy," and the National Women's Law Center.
Both Christian and Jewish denominations are represented. The plaintiffs include:
Rev. Traci Blackmon, United Church of Christ;
Maharat Rori Picker Neiss, Jewish Community Relations Council of St. Louis;
Rabbi Doug Alpert, Congregation Kol Ami, Kansas City;
Rev. Jan Barnes, United Church of Christ, Webster Groves (retired);
Rabbi Jim Bennett, Congregation Shaare Emeth, Creve Coeur;
Rev. Cindy Bumb, United Church of Christ, St. Louis (retired);
Rabbi Andrea Goldstein, Congregation Shaare Emeth, Creve Coeur;
Rev. Molly Housh Gordon, Unitarian Universalist Church of Columbia;
The Rt. Rev. Deon K. Johnson, Eleventh Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Missouri;
Rev. Holly McKissick, Peace Church United Church of Christ, Kansas City;
Rev. Barbara Phifer, retired United Methodist minister and State Representative in District 90;
Rabbi Susan Talve, Central Reform Congregation, St. Louis;
Rev. Krista Taves, Eliot Unitarian Chapel, Kirkwood, and First Unitarian Church, Alton, Illinois.
More:Gov. Parson outlines spending plan for schools, workforce and infrastructure in annual address
Who is the lawsuit against?
The State of Missouri, as well as "state and local officials responsible for enforcing or ensuring compliance with the abortion ban," according to the press release, which includes:
Missouri Gov. Michael L. Parson;
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey;
Prosecuting attorneys for Boone, Greene, Jackson, Jasper and St. Charles counties and the circuit attorney for the City of St. Louis, "on behalf of all Missouri Prosecuting and Circuit Attorneys," according to the lawsuit;
Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services Acting Director Paula F. Nickelson;
President, secretary and members of the Missouri State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts.
Why are they filing this lawsuit?
The lawsuit argues that HB 126 violates three sections of the Missouri Constitution that prohibit state officials from compelling people to support or participate in any religious activities or beliefs, favoring any particular religion, or using public money to support religion.
Rachel Laser, president and CEO of AU, said there was no question that the abortion ban was motivated by religion: "Missouri officials repeatedly told us they were codifying their personal religious beliefs."
In addition, the bill also says “Almighty God is the author of life" and makes assertions that life begins at conception, which plaintiffs argue is a religious belief.
"The Missouri Constitution ensures a strict separation of church and state. Our elected officials have violated their oath to uphold that constitution by weaponizing religious beliefs to deny abortion access in a state that studies prove that these actions are not the will of the majority of the people," said Blackmon, the associate general minister of justice and local church ministries for the United Church of Christ. "I am not here to debate the morality of abortion with anyone, I am here to defend women and birthing peoples' right not to have to. And to expose the hypocrisy of legislators that feign a pro-life agenda, while serving a pro-death penalty state."
Wouldn't clergy want religion to be codified in law?
The plaintiffs argue that the law is centered upon one specific religious belief, and disregards others. According to Picker Neiss, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of St. Louis, the trigger law directly contradicts her faith.
"Judaism demands of me, demands, that my first priority must be to the living, breathing, fully-formed person sitting in front of me," Picker Neiss said.
Like the other clergy that spoke, she was not asking for an exception in the law. Rather, she is asking for the separation of state and religion.
"I am not here to advocate that Missouri incorporate a Jewish view on abortion into our law," Picker Neiss said. "I am here because none of our religious views, on abortion or anything else, should be enshrined into our laws."
More:Josh Hawley says 'without the Bible, there is no America' in speech at conservative conference
What do legislators think?
Senate President Pro Tem Caleb Rowden, a Columbia Republican, called the lawsuit "foolish" when asked about it during a press conference in Jefferson City on Thursday. Rowden served as majority floor leader in the Senate when the law passed in 2019.
"We were acting on the belief that life is precious and should be treated as such," Rowden said. "I don't think that's a religious belief. I think people need to understand what separation of church and state is, and most people don't."
Susan Szuch is the health and public policy reporter for the Springfield News-Leader. Follow her on Twitter @szuchsm. Story idea? Email her at sszuch@gannett.com.
This article originally appeared on Springfield News-Leader: Missouri clergy sue state, saying abortion ban violates constitution
