Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge allows Illinois to cut off Catholic Charities' foster care
CNA ^ | 8/19/11 | Benjamin Mann

Posted on 08/19/2011 4:31:04 AM PDT by markomalley

An Illinois judge has ruled that the state has the right to end its foster care partnership with Catholic Charities in four dioceses, despite the Church ministry's contention that it was being dropped on religious grounds.

In his August 18 ruling, Illinois Circuit Court Judge John Schmidt held that “no citizen has a recognized legal right to a contract with the government.”

Thus, he explained, the state had no obligation to renew a long-standing arrangement with Catholic Charities in the dioceses, as it had annually for over 40 years.

But Catholic Charities argued that the state refused to renew the contracts because of the ministry's policy of adopting children only to married couples or single non-cohabiting adults, in keeping with Catholic teaching. Attorneys from the Thomas More Society maintained that Catholic Charities was illegitimately losing its contract due to its exercise of religion.

Illinois' Department of Children and Family Services had previously told Catholic Charities that it was ending the contract over Catholic Charities' alleged refusal to obey the 2011 “Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act,” which established legal privileges for same-sex and opposite-sex couples in civil unions.

Judge Schmidt, however, bypassed that issue in favor of what he said was the more fundamental question: not the reason why the state had chosen to pull the contracts after four decades, but whether the state was obligated to make or renew a contract with Catholic Charities under any circumstances.

And it was that question – which Judge Schmidt saw as both separate from the religious issue, and more basic – that he answered in the negative on Thursday.

“The fact that the Plaintiffs have contracted with the State to provide foster care and adoption services for over forty years does not vest the Plaintiffs with a protected property interest,” Judge Schmidt stated.

“The Plaintiffs invite this Court to extend the term 'legally protected property interest' to those whose state contracts are not renewed. The Court declines this invitation.”

“In sum,” Judge Schmidt held, “the Plaintiffs have failed to show they have a legally recognized property right to renew their contracts. The State may refuse to renew the Plaintiffs' contracts.”

Peoria Bishop Daniel R. Jenky, whose diocese is home to one of the Catholic Charities agencies involved in the lawsuit, expressed disappointment in a response issued the day of the ruling. He stressed Catholic Charities' contention that the state had no legitimate cause to end the contract.

“We continue to believe we can adhere to our religious principles and operate within Illinois law,” Bishop Jenky said.

He recalled that Catholic Charities has been “one of the lead providers of foster care services in the state,” and observed that “clearly the intent of the civil union law was not to force the state to end these contracts and force the transfer of thousands of children’s cases.”

An appeal against Judge Schmidt's August 18 order is possible. The Thomas More Society said on Thursday that its lawyers were “reviewing the ruling and considering next actions” with Catholic Charities officials.


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; moralabsolutes

1 posted on 08/19/2011 4:31:05 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Gay marriage is apparently more important to the judge than foster care for kids without parents.


2 posted on 08/19/2011 5:00:01 AM PDT by WaterBoard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I believe the queers have succeeded in doing a terrible wrong to adoptive and Foster care children in that state.

I don’t know who will be the new recipient of those children , but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if NAMBLA opened a Adoption agency and got the contract.


3 posted on 08/19/2011 5:01:50 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

What state was it that our Fruit loving President came from?


4 posted on 08/19/2011 5:04:19 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

While the state’s reasons are corrupt, the judge is correct. No charity can require a state to fund them.


5 posted on 08/19/2011 6:22:23 AM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
if nothing else, WHY do young women let their babies go to these gay homes?....WHY?.....are they so hateful towards the babies or are they just the silly, superficial obama voter types who want to be "nice".....

there is a special place in hell for people that place the little ones in harms way....IMO anyway.....

6 posted on 08/19/2011 6:38:34 AM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
SO, will the funds from the canceled contract be returned to the Illinois treasury ?

Some times, I just crack myself up !

7 posted on 08/19/2011 6:54:07 AM PDT by stylin19a (obama..."Fredo-Smart")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This will end well.


8 posted on 08/19/2011 7:27:44 AM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Charities that refuse to place already hard-luck foster children with homosexuals can no longer collaborate with the state of Illinois. But many of us, Catholic and not, believe that children should be raised in wholesome environments. Many of us also know , homosexual/entertainment industry/MSM propaganda notwithstanding, that homosexuals are far more likely than non homosexuals to molest children. Because the wealthy, highly organized homosexual movement supports Illinois Democrats, Illinois Democrats are prepared to condemn innocent children to environments that celebrate the unnatural as natural and the wrong as right. But people who are not sexual deviants are taxpayers as well. Surely their values should be reflected in state policy.
9 posted on 08/19/2011 7:34:05 AM PDT by Godwin1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

The Judge may be right. It was pretty slick the way he avoided the real issue.


10 posted on 08/19/2011 8:39:52 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson