Latest News

Purl v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit to challenge the Biden-Harris administration’s recent regulations that illegally restrict how doctors can protect patients from the harms of abortion and “gender transition.” ADF attorneys are representing Carmen Purl, M.D., a family physician and owner of Dr. Purl’s Fast Care Walk In Clinic in Dumas, Texas.

Dr. Purl wants to protect her patients by reporting suspected abuse, and to safeguard the health and safety of mothers and children, but the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ changes to rules under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) add unprecedented restrictions on doctors’ ability to report abuse and states’ ability to protect children from abortion and gender transition drugs and surgeries.

Such actions are unlawful because the HIPAA statute explicitly preserves state investigative authority and has no language allowing federal bureaucrats to use privacy rules to promote radical policies on abortion or gender ideology.

Press Release Explainer Case Documents

Luther Rice College and Seminary

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit against Georgia officials for excluding a Christian college from participating in student financial aid programs widely available to other colleges, harming high school and college students as a result.

Georgia offers student financial aid programs to help students cover tuition costs for undergraduate degree programs at Georgia colleges and universities. While the state allows private and religious colleges to participate in such programs, Georgia excludes schools that state officials consider a “school or college of theology or divinity.” Luther Rice College and Seminary, which ADF attorneys represent, is one such school that Georgia has barred from participating in student financial aid programs because it has a religious mission, awards religious degrees, and teaches all of its courses from a Christian perspective.

As a result, Luther Rice faces an unconstitutional choice between maintaining its religious mission, degree programs, and teaching all courses from a Christian worldview, or giving up that religious character and exercise to participate equally with other schools in the state.

Press Release Explainer Case Documents

Liam Morrison

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of Liam Morrison, a student who was forbidden by his Massachusetts middle school from wearing a T-shirt to school with the words “There are only two genders” and later with “There are [censored] genders” on the front, even though the school expressed a different view of sex and gender, and encouraged students to join in by wearing “Pride gear to celebrate Pride Month.”

In June, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit affirmed the school’s decision against Liam, prompting ADF attorneys to ask the Supreme Court to review the case and rule that Nichols Middle School in Middleborough violated the First Amendment when it stopped Liam from wearing his shirts to school.

Jack Phillips

The Colorado Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit brought by an attorney against cake artist Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop. For more than 12 years, Phillips has been relentlessly pursued and mocked by government officials and activists who disagree with his views.

Since 2012, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys have been defending Phillips, when he was first sued for declining to create a custom cake celebrating a same-sex wedding because it violated his religious beliefs. On the same day that the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would hear Phillips’ first case—in which he prevailed in 2018—an attorney called Masterpiece Cakeshop, requesting that Phillips create a custom cake that would symbolize and celebrate a “gender transition” from male to female. The attorney then called again to request another custom cake depicting Satan smoking marijuana to “correct the errors of [Phillips’] thinking.” Phillips politely declined the request because the cakes expressed messages that violated his core beliefs. Like many artists, he decides to create custom cakes based on what they will express, not who requests them.

Becerra v. State of Texas

The U.S. Supreme Court denied the federal government’s request to hear the case Becerra v. State of Texas, upholding a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. The 5th Circuit’s decision had blocked the Biden-Harris administration from illegally using federal law to create a mandate forcing emergency room hospitals and doctors to perform abortions.

In July 2022, the state of Texas, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Christian Medical and Dental Associations filed a lawsuit seeking to have the illegal abortion mandate struck down. Less than a month later, a federal district court in Texas granted our request to temporarily halt the mandate while the lawsuit proceeds, and the court made that injunction permanent in December 2022. The 5th Circuit upheld this decision in January 2024, allowing emergency rooms to fulfill their primary function—saving lives.

Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond.

In June 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board approved an application from the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa to operate the St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School as a charter school. But Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond filed a lawsuit challenging the Board’s approval of St. Isidore, and in July 2024, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that the board could not contract with St. Isidore solely because the school is religious.

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that religious groups cannot be excluded from generally available programs solely because of their religious character. That’s why ADF has petitioned the Supreme Court to hear this important case.

National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Bonta

On behalf of a nonprofit pro-life pregnancy center and a nonprofit network of affiliated centers, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed suit against the California attorney general for using his power to censor pro-life pregnancy centers because they tell women about the option of taking supplemental progesterone for abortion pill reversal. Progesterone is a safe and naturally occurring hormone that can be used to counteract the life-ending effects of abortion drugs.

In September 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued Heartbeat International, a national network of pregnancy centers, and RealOptions Obria Medical Clinics, a chain of five pregnancy centers in California, for publishing information about abortion pill reversal, including that it is safe and can be an effective treatment. Bonta’s politically motivated lawsuit threatens other pregnancy centers in the state that have made, or would like to make, similar statements. ADF attorneys are challenging the attorney general on behalf of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates and SCV Pregnancy Center in Santa Clarita.

Turning Point USA at the University of Memphis

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys sent a demand letter on behalf of Turning Point USA at the University of Memphis to college officials after an event sponsored by TPUSA was shut down by a student mob. ADF attorneys are asking University of Memphis administrators to reschedule the event, provide adequate security, and refund TPUSA an unconstitutional security fee it was forced to pay after the event was shut down.

TPUSA scheduled an event on-campus in March featuring conservative speaker Kyle Rittenhouse addressing the importance of individual rights and self-defense. In advance, students and others reserved tickets for the purpose of not showing up or to heckle the speaker and event organizers. At the event, students inside the theater loudly heckled and jeered, forcing Rittenhouse to end the event early. A mob chased TPUSA members to their cars, hurled death threats, and blocked them from exiting. The university then charged TPUSA $1,600 for security that stood idly by and allowed the mob to shut down the event. The University never punished any disruptor.

Peter Vlaming

The West Point School Board has agreed to pay $575,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees to settle a lawsuit brought by Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing former Virginia high school teacher Peter Vlaming. In 2018, Vlaming was fired by the school board after he stated he couldn’t in good conscience comply with the superintendent’s demand that he refer to one of his students using pronouns inconsistent with the student’s sex.

But in December 2023, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that it would reinstate Vlaming’s lawsuit after a lower court dismissed his case. In its opinion, the commonwealth’s high court wrote that the Virginia Constitution contains robust free speech and free exercise protections for public employees.

As part of the settlement agreement, the school board has also agreed to clear Peter Vlaming’s firing from his record. Separate from the settlement, the school board changed its policies to conform to the new Virginia education policies established by Gov. Glenn Youngkin that respect fundamental free speech and parental rights.

The Babylon Bee v. Bonta

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing The Babylon Bee and Kelly Chang Rickert, a California attorney, filed a complaint challenging two California laws that censor some online content, including political satire and parody. Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed the laws that censor freedom of speech by using vague standards to punish people for posting certain political content online, including political memes and parodies of politicians.

The two laws apply around election time to censor speech through subjective standards like prohibiting pictures and videos “likely to harm” a candidate’s “electoral prospects.” AB 2839 and AB 2655 apply to any person or entity who distributes what California officials decide is “materially deceptive content” about candidates, elected officials, and other election material. AB 2839 even forces speakers to include a disclaimer when posting satire, defeating the point of satire. AB 2655 applies to large online platforms and requires them to sometimes label, and other times remove, posts with “materially deceptive content.” Penalties for violating the laws include significant attorneys’ fees, costs, and damages. The suit explains that the laws interfere with The Babylon Bee’s and Rickert’s freedom of speech, as protected by the First Amendment.

Christian Employers Alliance v. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

The Biden-Harris administration agreed to pay $210,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs to conclude a lawsuit brought by Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing the Christian Employers Alliance.

The agreement follows a federal district court decision earlier this year that stopped the administration from forcing nonprofit and for-profit religious employers and healthcare providers to violate their religious beliefs by paying for and performing harmful “gender transition” surgeries, procedures, counseling, and treatments.

Christian Healthcare Centers & Sacred Heart of Jesus Parish

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled to allow the cases of a faith-based medical nonprofit and a parish and Catholic school to continue. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing Christian Healthcare Centers and Grand Rapids-based Sacred Heart of Jesus Parish and several of its families asked the court to uphold the Michigan ministries’ constitutionally protected freedom to operate as religious organizations consistent with their beliefs.

In July 2022, the Michigan Supreme Court reinterpreted Michigan’s non-discrimination law to include sexual orientation and gender identity. It did not provide exemptions for religious institutions seeking to operate according to their beliefs. This would require Sacred Heart of Jesus Parish and its school, Sacred Heart Academy, to hire faculty and staff who lead lives in direct opposition to the Catholic faith, speak messages that violate Church doctrine, and refrain from articulating Catholic beliefs in teaching its students and when advertising the school to prospective students or job applicants. The law also threatens the rights of parents—including the three families who have joined the lawsuit—who specifically chose to send their children to Sacred Heart Academy because the school aligns with their values and religious beliefs.

Josephson v. Ganzel

In a victory for free speech in higher education, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled in favor of Dr. Allan Josephson and sent his case back for trial.

After Dr. Josephson spoke in his personal capacity on his own time as part of a Heritage Foundation panel discussion about how best to treat children experiencing gender dysphoria, university officials demoted him to the role of a junior faculty member, stripped him of teaching duties, and subjected him to other forms of hostility. In February 2019, the university announced that it would not renew his contract in June, a highly unusual decision that terminated his employment at the university and ended his 40-year career. After he sued the school, a federal district court ruled in March 2023 that a jury should hear his claims that university officials retaliated against him for his constitutionally protected speech. The 6th Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision, ruling that university officials have to stand trial.

Wailes v. Jefferson County Public Schools

On behalf of three Colorado families, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit against Jefferson County Public Schools (JCPS) for violating parents’ fundamental right to make decisions about the upbringing and education of their children.

A JCPS policy directs that students should be “assigned to share overnight accommodations with other students that share the student’s gender identity” rather than rooming by sex. JCPS tells parents that “girls will be roomed together on one floor, and boys will be roomed together on a different floor,” but what district officials fail to disclose is that they have redefined the words “girl” and “boy” to mean a student’s self-asserted “gender identity” rather than sex. JCPS refuses to give parents truthful, pertinent information about their children’s overnight accommodations, thus hampering parents’ ability to make informed decisions about their children’s education and privacy.

ADF attorneys explain in the lawsuit that, as a result, parents will not have the information they need to protect their child’s privacy until it is too late—when the parents are not there; when the burden falls on the child to ask her roommates about their sex; and when there is a greater risk of causing all students discomfort or embarrassment.

Hunter v. U.S. Department of Education

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled against an attempt by activists to prevent students from using their federal aid at colleges and universities that share their religious beliefs. In the case, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represent three Christian post-secondary schools: Corban University, William Jessup University, and Phoenix Seminary.

In 2021, an activist group filed a lawsuit to prevent any students from using tuition grants, student loans, and any other federal financial assistance at schools that operate according to their religious beliefs on gender and sexual morality. In January 2023, when it appeared that the Department of Education would not sufficiently defend the schools’ religious protections, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon allowed the three Christian schools to intervene to defend the relevant provisions of Title IX. Among other things, Title IX allows students to use federal financial aid at private religious schools that operate according to their beliefs.

In its opinion, the 9th Circuit noted that legal precedents supporting the position of the schools represented by ADF demonstrate “a continuous, century-long practice of governmental accommodations for religion that the Supreme Court and our court have repeatedly accepted as consistent with the Establishment Clause. The examples provided by the Department demonstrate that religious exemptions have ‘withstood the critical scrutiny of time and political change.’”

National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. James

A federal district court ruled that two nonprofit pro-life pregnancy centers and a nonprofit network of affiliated centers in New York are free to tell women about the life-saving potential of using progesterone for abortion pill reversal while their lawsuit continues.

In the lawsuit, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys are representing the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, Gianna’s House, and Options Care Center. The pro-life pregnancy centers sued New York Attorney General Letitia James for abusing her authority by censoring the pregnancy centers because they tell women about the potential of using progesterone for abortion pill reversal. Progesterone is a safe and naturally occurring hormone that can often be successfully used to counteract the life-ending effects of abortion drugs when taken in time. The district court found the pregnancy centers are likely to succeed on the merits of their free speech claim, halting state officials from violating the centers’ freedom of speech while their case proceeds.

Biden-Harris Title IX rule

The U.S. Supreme Court denied the Biden-Harris administration’s request to partially reinstate its illegal attempt to change the meaning of the word “sex” to include “gender identity” in Title IX, a federal law designed to create equal opportunities for women in education and athletics. The high court’s denial comes in two different legal challenges to the administration’s Title IX rule changes, Cardona v. State of Tennessee and U.S. Department of Education v. State of Louisiana.

The Supreme Court’s decision upholds two recent federal appeals court rulings that halted the administration’s unlawful rules in the states of Tennessee, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Virginia; and Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho. In one case, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represent a West Virginia high-school female athlete and Christian Educators Association International; in the other, they represent a Louisiana school board serving more than 20,000 students.

Union Gospel Mission of Yakima v. Ferguson

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit overturned a lower court’s order dismissing a Washington state homeless ministry’s lawsuit against state officials. In the case, the Union Gospel Mission of Yakima is challenging a state law that limits its freedom to hire like-minded individuals who share and live out its religious beliefs and mission.

The government cannot force religious organizations to hire people who do not share their religious beliefs. The Constitution protects the Mission’s right to hire employees—for any position—who adhere to and live out the mission’s religious beliefs.

Youth 71Five Ministries v. Williams

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit granted a request from an Oregon ministry to allow it to receive critical state program funding to help serve at-risk youth as its appeal against state officials continues. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys are representing Youth 71Five Ministries in the case, which challenges the denial of previously approved funds simply because the group asks employees and volunteers to sign a statement of faith. ADF attorneys filed the lawsuit in March and filed a notice of appeal with the 9th Circuit in July after a lower court dismissed the case.

Turning Point USA at SUNY Cortland

ADF attorneys representing two students and a Turning Point USA chapter reached a favorable settlement agreement with a State University of New York Cortland official and the student government association after they denied the conservative group recognized status because of its views.

In March, SUNY Cortland officially recognized the TPUSA chapter shortly after ADF attorneys filed a lawsuit, but the student government failed to fully address its unconstitutional policy that allowed the conservative group to be denied recognized status in the first place. The student government has now agreed to revise the policy to respect the constitutionally protected freedoms of all students, including implementing an appeal process if a group is denied recognized status. As part of the settlement agreement, the student government and SUNY Cortland will also pay $42,000.

5 for 5 in halting Biden-Harris admin’s unlawful Title IX rule

A federal district court in Missouri ruled to immediately halt the Biden-Harris administration’s illegal attempted rewrite of Title IX while the lawsuit State of Arkansas v. U.S. Department of Education moves forward. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing Amelia Ford, a high school athlete from Arkansas, joined the states of Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota in a federal lawsuit filed in May against the administration for its attempt to redefine “sex” in Title IX to include “gender identity.” This recent ruling stops enforcement of the rule against Ford as well as against the six states that brought the lawsuit.

Out of five lawsuits in which ADF is involved, this is the fifth injunction halting the administration’s unlawful effort to change Title IX, a federal law designed to create equal opportunities for students in education and athletics.

Emilee Carpenter

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled that the case of a New York photographer and blogger may proceed and that a lower court should evaluate whether to issue an injunction to prevent New York from forcing her to create messages inconsistent with her faith in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark free speech decision in the Alliance Defending Freedom case 303 Creative v. Elenis.

ADF attorneys filed a supplemental brief with the 2nd Circuit in July 2023 explaining how 303 Creative protected photographer and blogger Emilee Carpenter. The brief argued that the appeals court should affirm Carpenter’s First Amendment rights, reverse a lower court’s ruling dismissing her case, and prevent officials from forcing Carpenter to create photographs and blogs inconsistent with her beliefs.

Female athletes ask SCOTUS to protect fairness, safety in women’s sports

The states of West Virginia and Idaho, together with attorneys from Alliance Defending Freedom, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the cases of female athletes who are seeking to protect women’s sports.

In B.P.J. v West Virginia State Board of Education, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and ADF are asking the Supreme Court to hear their case after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit hindered West Virginia from protecting fairness in women’s sports. The petition seeks review on behalf of West Virginia officials and former collegiate athlete Lainey Armistead.

In Hecox v. Little, Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador and ADF are asking the Supreme Court to uphold their state’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld an injunction against enforcement of the law. The petition seeks review on behalf of Idaho officials and athletes Madison Kenyon and Mary Kate Marshall.

Women and girls deserve to compete on a level playing field, and West Virginia’s and Idaho’s laws do just that, protecting women’s sports and equal opportunities.

State of Missouri v. Becerra

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing the American College of Pediatricians, together with seven states—including Missouri and Utah as co-leads—are suing the Biden administration for adopting a rule that forces medical professionals and insurance providers to perform and pay for harmful “gender-transition” procedures or face severe financial consequences. This is the third lawsuit ADF attorneys have filed against the administration’s attempt to rewrite federal healthcare law.

In May, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released a new rule under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act that requires doctors to act against their sound medical judgment and perform harmful, often sterilizing procedures to make people, including children, appear to be the opposite sex, even if state law restricts these procedures. Additionally, the new rule requires insurance coverage for these procedures; coerces specific gender-related medical speech and the use of inaccurate pronouns; and forces medical facilities to provide access to sex-specific spaces based on gender identity.

State of Idaho v. United States of America

In a per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of this case but instead sent it back to the lower courts for further consideration. While the justices issued four separate opinions, none of the opinions commanded a majority. Five justices voted to return the case to the 9th Circuit, which had scheduled the case for en banc consideration by an 11-member panel. However, Justice Barrett issued a separate opinion that said Idaho’s law will continue to save lives “in the vast majority of circumstances” as the case continues.

ADF will continue to assist the state of Idaho and bring a rightful end to the administration’s unlawful overreach and protect the people’s freedom to preserve life.

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Scardina

ADF attorneys representing Jack Phillips and his cake shop asked the state high court to protect Phillips from being forced to express messages that violate his beliefs. Oral arguments were held today.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in 303 Creative v. Elenis that upheld free speech for all, ADF attorneys filed a supplemental notice with the Colorado Supreme Court, asking it to apply that ruling and similarly affirm Phillips’ free-speech rights in this case. Activists and Colorado officials have misused the same state law that was at issue in 303 Creative to punish Phillips for more than a decade.

State of Tennessee v. United States Department of Education

In a victory for female athletes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled to uphold a lower court order that blocks, in 20 states, Biden administration guidance documents that illegitimately reinterpret federal law to allow, among other things, males to compete in women’s sports. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represent Arkansas female athlete Amelia Ford and the Association of Christian Schools International.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court released its opinion in ADF’s case against the FDA. While we’re disappointed the Court did not address the merits of the FDA’s unlawful removal of commonsense safety standards for abortion drugs, nothing in today’s decision changes this fact: women and girls are being harmed by the FDA’s recklessness. The FDA’s own label says that roughly one in 25 women who take chemical abortion drugs will end up in the emergency room.

ADF will continue to expose the reckless actions of the FDA and the harms of abortion drugs. And we are grateful three states stand ready to hold the FDA accountable for jeopardizing the health and safety of women and girls across this country.

Wuoti v. Winters

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of two Vermont families after the state revoked their foster-care licenses because of their religious beliefs.

Inspired by their faith, two couples wanted to help meet Vermont’s “desperate” need for foster families. Pastor Brian Wuoti and his wife, Katy, became foster parents in 2014 and successfully adopted two brothers from foster care. Pastor Bryan Gantt and his wife, Becca, became foster parents in 2016 and focused on caring for children born with drug dependencies or with fetal alcohol syndrome. The Gantts have since adopted three children.

Despite a track record of success and high praise from social workers who knew them, Vermont’s Department for Children and Families revoked their foster-care licenses after the couples expressed their religiously inspired and widely held belief that girls cannot become boys or vice versa. They also expressed concern about the department’s policy requiring them to use inaccurate pronouns, take children to pride parades, and encourage children to reject their bodies.

Such policies violate the rights of foster and adoptive parents and deny children the opportunity to be placed in a loving home.

Obria Group v. Ferguson

Following a lawsuit brought by ADF attorneys, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson officially closed his unconstitutional investigation of a faith-based, pro-life network of pregnancy centers and one of its affiliated centers and stated he would not file litigation. ADF attorneys, representing Obria Group and Obria Medical Clinics PNW, challenged Ferguson for singling them out because of their life-affirming views through an unlawful investigation into their sensitive records and materials.

Ferguson issued civil investigative demands that dictate, for a time period exceeding 13 years, that the pregnancy centers provide answers to questions and production of documents under the pretense of conducting a civil investigation into “possible” violations of Washington’s Consumer Protection Act. Ferguson’s investigation did not appear to be based on a complaint or other substantive evidence of wrongdoing but was rather an exploratory probe into the lawful activities of two organizations that hold a view on a matter of public policy that Ferguson doesn’t favor.

Ferguson had previously denied that his investigation caused the clinics any harm and had said this precluded the federal court from hearing the clinics’ claims. But after one of the clinics showed that Ferguson’s investigation caused it to lose insurance coverage and to pay seven times more for replacement coverage, Ferguson issued an official letter closing his investigation.

National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. James

On behalf of two nonprofit pro-life pregnancy centers and one nonprofit network of affiliated centers, ADF attorneys are suing the New York attorney general for using her power to censor pro-life pregnancy centers’ ability to tell women about the option of using progesterone for abortion pill reversal. Progesterone is a safe and naturally occurring hormone that may be used to counteract the life-ending effects of abortion drugs. Some statistical estimates suggest that over 5,000 babies’ lives have been saved through this treatment.

Yet, New York Attorney General Letitia James recently sued 11 faith-based pro-life pregnancy centers and a network of affiliated centers in the state seeking to silence their ability to tell women about their medical care options. Even though the centers offer these options for free, and progesterone supplements have been used safely for decades, New York is attempting to use laws that prohibit business fraud to suppress women’s access to this life-saving information. In doing so, the Attorney General is unlawfully targeting pro-life pregnancy centers, threatening punishment for promoting and offering a service that gives women the option of changing their minds and attempting to save their baby’s life. Such actions from a government official violate the pregnancy centers’ First Amendment rights to speak freely and practice their religious beliefs—and they deny women access to vital medical information.

Carroll Independent School District

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Carroll Independent School District challenging a Biden administration rule change to unlawfully rewrite Title IX. The district is located in Southlake, Texas, and operates 11 schools for students from pre-K to 12th grade, with a student body of approximately 8,400.

On April 19, the administration announced it would redefine “sex” in Title IX rules to include “gender identity,” requiring schools to ignore the biological distinction between male and female in favor of “an individual’s sense of their gender.” Under this rule, schools will have to allow males who identify as female to enter girls’ private spaces like restrooms, locker rooms, and showers and—despite logically inconsistent disclaimers saying otherwise—to play on girls’ sports teams. The new rule also requires the school district to enforce policies restricting students’ and employees’ free-speech rights.

Carroll Independent School District adopted a resolution denouncing the rule change, emphasizing that the rule could “jeopardiz[e] the safety and well-being of students.”

State of Kansas v. U.S. Department of Education

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, together with attorneys general from three other states, Alliance Defending Freedom, and private groups of parents, students, and female athletes, filed a federal lawsuit against the Biden administration for its attempt to rewrite Title IX, a federal law designed to create equal opportunities for students in education and athletics.

ADF attorneys are representing Female Athletes United, an organization made up of female athletes and other supporters of women’s sports, and Katie Rowland, a 13-year-old student who had to stop using the restrooms at her Oklahoma public school for a time because the school allowed males who identify as female to access this private space. In addition, two other groups, Moms for Liberty and Young America’s Foundation, also joined the lawsuit. Together, they formed a broad coalition to challenge the administration’s attempt to redefine “sex” in federal law to include “gender identity,” and to protect privacy, safety, free speech, and fairness for students and teachers.