* I always thought that John Schmidt was a pretty darned good Sangamon County State’s Attorney back in the day. We had several long conversations about crime and punishment and he really seemed to have put a lot of thought into his role in the criminal justice system.
That thoughtfulness has apparently followed him to the circuit court bench. Despite being up for election next year in a very Catholic area, Schmidt issued a concise, to the point opinion in a case which pitted Catholic Charities against Gov. Pat Quinn’s administration over the right of the group to participate in adoptions and foster care while refusing to place kids with people who entered into state approved civil unions. You can read Schmidt’s opinion by clicking here.
* AP…
An Illinois judge ruled Thursday that the state can stop working with Catholic Charities on adoptions and foster-care placements, which the state decided to do in July after the nonprofit agency refused to recognize Illinois’ new civil unions law.
Sangamon County Circuit Judge John Schmidt said that no one, including Catholic Charities, has a legal right to a contract with the state government. He did not address the more sensitive issue of whether a state contractor that refuses to serve gays and lesbians is violating the state’s new civil unions law.
The state Department of Children and Family Services ended $30 million in contracts with Catholic Charities in four dioceses in July, but Schmidt temporarily reinstated them while he considered the case.
* Pantagraph…
Catholic Charities argued the state could not cancel contracts that have been in place for four decades. Attorneys said the organizations had a legal right under the state’s constitution to follow their religious beliefs and only provide services to married couples and single parents living alone.
In the Peoria Diocese, the ruling affects 975 children in foster care. The Springfield Diocese has 257 cases, and the Joliet Diocese has 218. The Belleville Diocese has 547 foster care cases.
* Gatehouse…
The state has never forced Catholic Charities to accept state contracts, Schmidt wrote.
At a hearing Wednesday, assistant attorney general Deborah Barnes argued the state has the right to set contract terms within the limits of the law.
A spokesman for Catholic Charities issued a brief written statement in response to Schmidt’s decision.
“The ruling does not address Catholic Charities’ contention that the state of Illinois cannot refuse to contract with someone based on that person’s exercise of religion,” the statement said. “Thomas More Society attorneys are reviewing the ruling and considering next actions with Charities.”
* Tribune…
Pointing to a clause in the Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act that they believe protects religious institutions that don’t recognize civil unions, the agencies said they would refer those couples elsewhere and only license married couples and single parents living alone.
But lawyers for the Illinois attorney general said that exemption only shields religious clergy who don’t want to officiate at civil unions. The policy of Catholic Charities violates state anti-discrimination laws that demand couples in civil unions be treated the same as married couples, they said. […]
Tom Brejcha, the lawyer for Catholic Charities, said he likely would ask Schmidt to reconsider the issue of religious liberty, which he believes is more relevant than property rights. Brejcha also said he likely would ask the state to agree to a stay of the judge’s order until all appeals are exhausted. Such a stay would delay the transfer of about 2,200 children in Catholic Charities’ care to new child welfare agencies.
“There’s a lot to argue about here,” Brejcha said. “The exercise of religion can not be substantially burdened. … That alone could carry the case for Catholic Charities. A lot of these people involved feel they are compelled by their faith. … The burden is pretty substantial.”
* Reuters…
Bishop Daniel Jenky, the head of the Diocese of Peoria, said in a statement that the unwillingness of DCFS to make an exception for religious groups suggested that “important elements of the political establishment in the state of Illinois are now basically at war with the Catholic community and seem to be destroying their institutions.”
Kendall Marlowe, deputy director of DCFS, said Catholic Charities has been one of the better quality care providers in Illinois, but that does not excuse them from following state law.
“We don’t want to see them leave the field, but the law has changed in Illinois and all child welfare agencies have to respect civil unions,” he said.
“While it may be unfortunate that we have to make this transition, we will be able to make this transition without significant disruption for these children.”
* From a longer AP story…
Now that a Sangamon County judge has ruled Catholic Charities does not have a right to state contracts, the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services plans to resume the process of removing some 2,000 foster care and adoption cases from Catholic Charities agencies in Peoria, Joliet, Springfield and Belleville.
DCFS will review each child’s case, as well as the performance and capacity of other private agencies before transferring Catholic Charities’ caseloads to other agencies.
* ACLU press release…
Today’s decision by Judge Schmidt is a good decision for the children under the care of DCFS in Illinois. The primary goal in foster care and adoptive services must be the best interest of the children in need of loving, secure homes. The State has a responsibility and constitutional obligation to assure that all decisions about foster and permanent homes for children are made in the best interest of the child – not other factors including the religious views of the contractual provider. Lesbian and gay men across Illinois daily provide secure, good homes for foster and adoptive children – and have done so for many years. These loving parents must be allowed to participate fully and equally in any program performing the state’s function of licensing and placing children with foster or adoptive parents.
Thoughts?
- CircularFiringSquad - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 9:45 am:
Judge Schmidt is a bright guy
Bet he also understands the seperation of chrch and state is a two way street.
So if the church wants the state cash they need to operate by the state rules.
No more no less.
Let’s expect the bishops to go on the war path with this
Just remember the money when you read their protests
- PaGo - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 9:50 am:
As you mentioned in your lead-in, Judge Schmidt and his family are very involved in the Catholic parish in which they belong. I’m sure there will be some conversation, but as you said, they need to be well thought out discussions. As a member of the Catholic Church, I’ve always believed you can maintain your faith while evolving with your faith as it pertains to today’s society. Taking the hard line based on early teachings is ignorant, in my view.
- Dirt Digger - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 9:58 am:
Good conclusion, good rationale.
- How Ironic - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:09 am:
The way it should be. Catholic Charities can continue to discriminate as they see fit. Just not with taxpayer money.
If they feel so strongly about the children, and not the money…it should be easy for them to line up private donations to continue to discriminate.
I wish them luck in the future.
- Nuance - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:09 am:
His legal opinion makes sense regardless of your personal opinion on the politics of it all, but I do worry about how the State will handle the associated transition. This will be watched closely and hopefully they will not mess it up.
- Cincinnatus - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:17 am:
“Sangamon County Circuit Judge John Schmidt said that no one, including Catholic Charities, has a legal right to a contract with the state government.”
Does this mean that unions also don’t have a right?
- walkinfool - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:22 am:
The bishop will use this issue to continue to rally his troops for the political war he describes above. He has been highly partisan politically, before this issue, and beyond many of his peers.
- Aldyth - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:23 am:
You can’t take the state’s money and pick and choose which of the rules and regulations you’re going to follow.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:25 am:
===Does this mean that unions also don’t have a right? ===
The right to collectively bargain for a contract is in state law.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:52 am:
I think it’s the right decision but I would have hoped for an order to create a transition period for the children involved. In the absence of a well-thought out plan, I think we’ll see some hasty action on DCFS’ part that will cause great disruption for some of these children. I hope they don’t simply march in and scoop up children currently in the care of Catholic Charities. They need to have a good case by case plan to ease these children into new contractors’ care.
- Anonymous - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 11:08 am:
As someone of Irish heritage, who grew up in the Church in Chicago, I don’t see too much difference in the reaction here and the reaction of the Church in Ireland. The current hierarchy does not seem to understand that they can no longer expect blind obedience the way they have in the past. They are alienating and driving away Catholics world wide and they do not seem to understand why.
Allowing someone to adopt or foster a child in need of a parent can no longer be limited to married couples. There are too many children in need.
- don - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 11:09 am:
Now these children will return to the effective protection of the State.
- Ghost - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 11:11 am:
They dont have a right to the contract, but there is still a ginat elephant in the room…the State can not deny a contract for an unlawful reason, i.e. race, RELIGION, etc prohibited reasons fro denying contracts. Not to mention the 1st amendment problem of a Government using its authroity to force a relgioun to operate under the State’s belief system in order to contract wiht it. As you may recall, Englnad formed its onw religion when the Catholic Church would not operate the way the King wanted. The heart of the first amendment is that Government should not use its power to favor or disfavor on set of beleifs.
Religious freedom is not anti-religion, its a prohibition on misues of the States power to faor one religion or beleife system over another. The State has done that here, only religions which follow the States beleif system may contract with it.
The question which needs addressed is can a religious organization legaly not support civil unions. If it can, then the State can not use that as a reason to deny a contract. If it isillegal for a religious group to not support civil unions, then Catholic Charities has to follow the law.
Schmidt still left the religious freedom issue in the case; i.e. that the contract isbeing pulled for a proibited reason, which is unlawful.
- Lulabell - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 11:32 am:
I think the decision is sound and right. The Catholic Church and any other church can hold to their religious beliefs but shouldnt be expected to then be able to have all the state benefits also if they continue to discriminate against Illinois citizens.
- Cook County Commoner - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 12:49 pm:
Catholic Charities can continue to do what it does, but it cannot receive state compensation for it. There is no right to a contract renewal absent terms and conditions to that effect. If it wanted a different result, it needed to buy itself some constitutional protection, like the government unions did at Constitution Art. XIII, Sec. 5. At least Judge Schmidt won’t have the Westboro Baptist Church on his doorstep. But the can of worms has just begun to be opened. Can GLBTQ couples now force Catholic Charities to accept them as foster parents?
- Cincinnatus - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 12:53 pm:
“- Rich Miller - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 10:25 am:
===Does this mean that unions also don’t have a right? ===
The right to collectively bargain for a contract is in state law.”
Exactly! You have a right to bargain for it, and Quinn has shown you don’t have an actual right to the contract. Reminds me of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7uvttu8ct0
- nothin's easy - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 1:16 pm:
Ghost, it’s called spell check…geez.
- Black Ivy - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 1:33 pm:
The ACLU-IL’s position is tenuous at best and short-sighted. While it may be legally accurate to conclude that “no citizen has a recognized legal right to a contract with the government,” the practical effects are that a well respected, reputable religious charity will no longer be providing vital services for children in need. This “civil union” debate comes down to the right of Illinois’ GLBT citizens to adopt children vs. the right of a religious charity to adhere to its own convictions. As usual, Governor Quinn is pandering to his ultra-liberal base and skirting the heart of the matter. Surely, the State can reach some type of middle ground. Children in need deserve it!
- Small Town Liberal - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 1:42 pm:
- This “civil union” debate comes down to the right of Illinois’ GLBT citizens to adopt children vs. the right of a religious charity to adhere to its own convictions. -
How hard is this to grasp? The church is free to adhere to its own convictions all they want to. Absolutely no one is infringing on their rights. They, however, aren’t free to take taxpayer money if they’re not going to use it in accordance with the law. I’m not sure how anyone could make this easier to understand, if you want to meet me somewhere I’ll try to draw a picture.
- Nearly Normal - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 2:56 pm:
Time for Catholic Charities to re-think what they can do for youth and children if they are no longer in the foster care business. Surely there are other options for them. How about programs to give troubled parents the skills and mentoring to keep families together?
- Cincinnatus - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 3:34 pm:
Nearly Normal,
If CC would go into those areas, and money is provided from the state, would not the same arguments used against CC for adoption be used there?
- Small Town Liberal - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 3:55 pm:
- would not the same arguments used against CC for adoption be used there? -
Only if they refuse to provide service to people for a reason that isn’t allowable by law.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Aug 19, 11 @ 4:31 pm:
@Nearly Normal -
Great suggestion, except that Catholic Charities would likely refuse to provide those services to civil union couples, which they couldn’t legally do.
Look, this is just the tip of the iceberg for Catholic Charities.
In order to adopt through Catholic Charities of Peoria, you are required to:
“Be grounded in faith and demonstrate a commitment to the mission and core values of Catholic Charities.”
Sounds to me like their discriminatory practices go FAR beyond lesbian and gay couples.
Like, just believing that gay Americans deserve equal rights could get you disqualified. Or that the Pope is fallible.
- wordslinger - Monday, Aug 22, 11 @ 4:50 am:
–Bishop Daniel Jenky, the head of the Diocese of Peoria, said in a statement that the unwillingness of DCFS to make an exception for religious groups suggested that “important elements of the political establishment in the state of Illinois are now basically at war with the Catholic community and seem to be destroying their institutions.”–
The Catholic hierarchy doesn’t need any help from the state in destroying their institutions. They’ve been doing a swell job of it on their own for decades now. None so blind as those who will not see.