PRESS RELEASE
November 3, 2025
Contact: James Bopp, Jr.
Cell Phone 812/243-0825; Phone 812/232-2434; Fax 812/235-3685; [email protected]

Oregon Right to Life Obtains Victory in 9th Circuit Ruling that Agreed that ORTL's Objection to Abortion Was Religiously Based

On Friday, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Oregon Right to Life (“ORTL”), a pro-life organization whose lawsuit had been wrongfully dismissed by the district court.

ORTL had asked the district court to prohibit Oregon from enforcing a state law (the “Mandate”) that would require it to pay for abortion coverage in its health insurance plans for employees, even though ORTL objects to abortion on religious grounds. Although the Mandate required health insurance plans throughout the state to cover abortion, it included both secular exceptions and exceptions for other religious organizations that met Oregon's profoundly narrow definition of a “religious employer.”

Such a statutory scheme infringes on bedrock First Amendment protections. When the government gives a pass to some based on secular criteria, the Constitution prohibits it from requiring others to act in violation of their sincere religious beliefs. The same principles also prohibit the government from picking and choosing religious “winners” and “losers” by creating its own definition of “religious.” Accordingly, the Mandate's requirement that ORTL purchase employee insurance plans that cover abortion, the very thing ORTL is devoted to fighting against based on religious beliefs, was in plain violation of ORTL's religious liberty.

The lower court sidestepped these problems by declaring that there was doubt that ORTL's pro- life beliefs were actually religious in the first place. As ORTL argued before the Ninth Circuit panel, that determination relied on a deeply flawed analysis that simply ignored voluminous, uncontested evidence. The panel agreed, succinctly stating that “the religious motivation for ORTL's beliefs is both abundantly clear and unrebutted, and the district court erred in concluding otherwise.”

The panel therefore reversed the lower court's finding concerning ORTL's beliefs. Moreover, it instructed the court that, in moving forward with the case, it should pay heed to the Supreme Court's recent decision in Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, which found that a Wisconsin law with a remarkably similar exemption fornarrowly defined religious entities violated the Constitution's requirement of religious neutrality.

“It is crucial for courts to take claims of religious belief seriously. The First Amendment would ring hollow if courts were allowed to simply declare that plainly religious beliefs are not religious after all and therefore do not merit constitutional protection. We are glad that the Ninth Circuit panel issued a decision that recognizes the essential nature of the constitution's most foundational protections,” said attorney James Bopp, Jr., of The Bopp Law Firm, PC, lead counsel for ORTL.

“I am thrilled and heartened that the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in our favor, recognizing our clear claim to an exception from being forced to finance abortions. I am also deeply grateful for our legal team's incredible work in getting us to this key victory,” Oregon Right to Life Executive Director Lois Anderson said. “Of course, it is absurd on its face that Oregon Right to Life—a pro-life organization dedicated to opposing abortion—should be forced to provide insurance for abortions. As our case now heads back to the district court, we look forward to continuing to defend our conscience rights. The strength of our arguments, along with the skill and commitment of our legal team, give us good reason to hope for a final ruling that fully affirms our right to an exemption from funding abortion.”

Read the Ninth Circuit opinion here.