Fort Des Moines Church of Christ v. Jackson

• Decision Date: 14 October 2016
• Docket Number: Case No. 4:16-cv-00403-SMR-CFB
• Citation: 215 F.Supp.3d 776
• Parties: FORT DES MOINES CHURCH OF CHRIST, a nonprofit religious corporation Plaintiff, v. Angela JACKSON, Patricia Lipski, Mathew Hosford, Tom Conley, Douglas Oelschlaeger, Lily Lijun Hou, and Lawrence Cunningham, each in his or her official capacity as Commissioners of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission; Kristin H. Johnson, in her official capacity as the Executive Director of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission; Tom Miller, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the state of Iowa; and the City of Des Moines, Iowa, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Iowa

215 F.Supp.3d 776

FORT DES MOINES CHURCH OF CHRIST, a nonprofit religious corporationPlaintiff,

v.Angela JACKSON, Patricia Lipski, Mathew Hosford, Tom Conley, Douglas Oelschlaeger, Lily Lijun Hou, and Lawrence Cunningham, each in his or her official capacity as Commissioners of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission; Kristin H. Johnson,¹ in her official capacity as the Executive Director of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission; Tom Miller, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the state of Iowa; and the City of Des Moines, Iowa, Defendants.

Case No. 4:16-cv-00403-SMR-CFB

United States District Court, S.D. Iowa, Central Division.

Signed October 14, 2016

Christiana Michelle Holcomb, Erik William Stanley, Jeremy D. Tedesco, Steve Thomas O'Ban, Alliance Defending Freedom, Scottsdale, AZ, David A. Cortman, Alliance Defending Freedom, Lawrenceville, GA, Timm W. Reid, Galligan & Reid PC, Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff.

Molly McConville Weber, Iowa Attorney General, Michelle Mackel-Wiederanders, Des Moines City Attorney, Des Moines, IA, for Defendants.

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, STATE DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS, AND CITY OF DES MOINES'S MOTION TO DISMISS

STEPHANIE M. ROSE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I.INTRODUCTION

The Fort Des Moines Church of Christ, Plaintiff, alleges state and municipal antidiscrimination laws unconstitutionally interfere with its First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.Plaintiff would like to communicate messages that would place qualifications based on gender identity on who may use its restrooms and showers.It would also like to explain its views supporting these qualifications through the delivery of a sermon drafted by one of its pastors.To these ends, it moves for a preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of certain provisions of the Iowa Civil Rights Act("ICRA") and the Des Moines City Code, both of which prohibit places of public accommodation from discriminating based on gender identity.Both sets of laws contain exemptions for religious acts of religious institutions.The members of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission("ICRC") and the Attorney General(collectively "the StateDefendants") and Defendant City of Des Moines("the City") move to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint.The three motions came before the Court for a combined hearing on August 31, 2016.The matters are fully briefed, submitted, and ready for consideration.

For reasons stated below, Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction is DENIED .The Court also DENIES the motions to dismiss filed by the StateDefendants and the City.

II.BACKGROUND

The following facts come from Plaintiff's Complaint,[ECF No. 1], and its Motion for Preliminary Injunction,[ECF No. 9].In addition to Plaintiff's motion, there are two motions to dismiss pending before the Court, [ECF Nos. 23, 25].In considering these motions, the Court accepts as true the well-pleaded allegations of the Complaint.Schriener v. Quicken Loans, Inc. , 774 F.3d 442, 444(8th Cir.2014).Facts and conclusions determined by a court in granting or denying a preliminary injunction are provisional and nonbinding.Henderson v. Bodine Aluminum, Inc. , 70 F.3d 958, 962(8th Cir.1995);Sak v. City of Aurelia, Iowa , 832 F.Supp.2d 1026, 1031(N.D. Iowa2011).

Plaintiff is a Des Moines church that offers religious ministries, worship services, and other events and activities to its members and the public at large.[ECF No. 1at 7].Plaintiff holds three weekly services, all open to the public.[ECF No. 1at 8].Additionally, Plaintiff regularly opens its facility to the public for weddings, funerals, recreational and community activities, such as child care, a food pantry, and pot luck dinners.Id.Plaintiff states that even those activities that may not seem overtly religious are "religious in nature because they engender other important elements of religious meaning, expression, and purpose."[ECF No. 1at 3].Plaintiff stresses it does not wish to allow the use of its facility in any manner that is inconsistent with its religious mission and doctrine.[ECF No. 1at 8].

Plaintiff's facility has two multi-occupancy restrooms, each designated for the exclusive use of either males or females.[ECF No. 1at 9].Each restroom is equipped with a shower.Id.The showers are located within the restrooms and they share an entrance.Id.Additionally, the facility has two single-occupancy restrooms also designated for the separate use of each sex.Id.Plaintiff views these designations as being limited to biological males or females.[ECF No. 1at 10].According to its beliefs, "sex" is an individual's biological sex, determined at the time of birth by the individual's anatomy, physiology, and chromosomes.Id.Plaintiff has maintained an unwritten policy that areas designated for sex-specific use may only be used by members of the requisite biological sex—a policy that comports with its religious teachings.Id.

In view of recent coverage of issues such as gender identity and restroom access, Plaintiff decided its policy should be clarified for its members and the public.[ECF No. 1at 11].Plaintiff's leadership team adopted a written policy regarding the use of its facilities:

In light of recent developments within and outside of the state, the church leadership determined that it is necessary to notify members and the public who attend the church's worship services, and other services, events and activities of the following policy:

The church's multiple occupancy bathrooms and the showers in the bathrooms are designated for single-sex use only."Sex" is biological sex as determined by the physical condition of a person's chromosomes and anatomy as identified at birth, or by one's original birth certificate.This policy is consistent with and required by God's Word, which sets forth the distinctiveness, complementariness and immutability of the male sex and female sex as Jesus Christ himself taught in Matthew 19:4.God's Word also teaches that physical privacy and personal modesty spring from the physical conditions and unique characteristics of the sexes.

This bathroom and shower policy will be made available to members and the public by placing it on the church website and as an insert to the weekly worship bulletin that is distributed to all attendees of the Sunday worship service.We will also post this notice outside of our bathrooms within the building.

[ECF No. 1-1].Despite the above language regarding its intent to distribute the policy, Plaintiff has not publicized or distributed the policy due to its belief that such publication and distribution would subject it to enforcement proceedings before the ICRC or the Des Moines Civil and Human Rights Commission pursuant to state and municipal antidiscrimination laws.[ECF No. 1at 12].

Several Iowa statutes and Des Moines ordinances are the focus of this action.In 2007, the Iowa legislature amended Iowa Code section 216.7(1)(a) of the ICRA to bar places of public accommodation from discriminating against individuals on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.See2007 Iowa Actsch. 191, § 2.Iowa Code section 216.7 provides:

1.It shall be an unfair or discriminatory practice for any owner, lessee, sublessee, proprietor, manager, or superintendent of any public accommodation or any agent or employee thereof:

a. To refuse or deny to any person because of race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, or disability the accommodations, advantages, facilities, services, or privileges thereof, or otherwise to discriminate against any person because of race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, or disability in the furnishing of such accommodations, advantages, facilities, services, or privileges.

b. To directly or indirectly advertise or in any other manner indicate or publicize that the patronage of persons of any particular race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, or disability is unwelcome, objectionable, not acceptable, or not solicited.

2.This section shall not apply to:

a. Any bona fide religious institution with respect to any qualifications the institution may impose based on religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity when such qualifications are related to a bona fide religious purpose.

The ICRC released a brochure intended to serve as a guide to its interpretation of Iowa law with respect to civil rights issues concerning sexual orientation and gender identity.[ECF No. 1at 15].The brochure was entitled Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity: A Public Accommodations Provider's Guide to Iowa Law .Within the original brochure, the ICRC posed the question "Does This Law Apply to Churches?"In response to that question, the ICRC posited the following:

Sometimes.Iowa law provides that these protections do not apply to religious institutions with respect to any religion-based qualifications when such qualifications are related to a bona fide religious purpose .Where qualifications are not related to a bona fide religious purpose, churches are still subject to the law's provisions.(e.g. a child care facility operated at a church or a church service open to the public).

[ECF Nos. 1at 15; 27-2].Not long after Plaintiff filed this action, the ICRC removed the original guide from its website and replaced it with a new one.[ECF No. 9-1at 21].The current version contains the subsection "Places of Worship," which states:

Places of worship (e.g. churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.) are generally exempt from the Iowa law's prohibition of discrimination, unless the place of worship engages in non-religious activities which are open to the public.For example, the law may apply to an independent day care or polling place located on the premises of the place of worship.

Id.Both versions of the brochure contained a disclaimer: "This guidance document is...