A Hamilton County Superior Court 1 judge has ruled in favor of four Indiana cities, including Columbus, in a lawsuit challenging Indiana’s fix to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the cities’ protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender residents.
Judge Michael Casati granted motions for summary judgment Thursday to Carmel, Columbus, Indianapolis/Marion County, Bloomington and the State of Indiana in a lawsuit, filed by the Terre Haute-based Bopp Law Firm, that has been pending since 2015.
A motion for summary judgment is a request for the court to rule based on at least one claim without holding a trial. Typically, the motion must show that no genuine issue of material fact exists, and that the opposing party loses on that claim even if all its allegations are accepted as true, according to the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute.
The lawsuit was initially filed as a challenge to the legislative fix to Indiana’s RFRA, and originally named Carmel and Indianapolis/Marion County as defendants. Bloomington and Columbus were added as defendants in January 2016 after each city added human rights protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender residents as part of each city’s human rights ordinances.
The law firm filed the complaint on behalf of plaintiffs the Indiana Family Institute, Indiana Family Action and the American Family Association of Indiana, which contend the versions of the ordinances that protect the LGBT community from discrimination means the government could compel them to provide services to gay couples that go against the organization’s religious beliefs.
Because the primary attack was on Indiana’s state statute, the State of Indiana was also added as a defendant in the case.
Casati heard oral arguments from the parties on Oct. 3 in Hamilton Superior Court 1. Columbus city attorney Alan Whitted spoke on behalf of the City of Columbus for nearly 30 minutes during the Oct. 3 hearing, arguing that the city’s human rights ordinance protects the right for religious expression as well as everyone’s right for full access to employment and opportunities to participate.
In fall 2015, the Columbus City Council unanimously approved an amendment to its human rights ordinance that added discrimination protections based on sexual orientation, gender identity, age and veteran status.
The Columbus amendment provided no exemptions for religious beliefs, but human rights commissioners said religion is already a protected class in the human rights ordinance, along with race, sex, disability and national origin or ancestry.
Whitted said the plaintiffs agreed there had not been any enforcement action, but felt as though they had been chilled under a constitutional principle that they can’t do what they want to do because of these ordinances.
“The evidence was pretty clear and not disputed by the plaintiffs they they don’t have employees in Columbus, they have no office in Columbus, they offer no programming in Columbus; they have no presence in Columbus,” Whitted said.
He said the plaintiffs said they don’t have any immediate plans to have any employees, open offices or hold programming in Columbus, but don’t want to rule out the option. Their argument is that Columbus’ human rights ordinance chilled their First Amendment rights.
“There wasn’t a controversy for the courts to adjudicate,” Whitted said. “That was a big basis for the motion of summary judgement.”
Indiana lawmakers amended an initial version of RFRA in 2015 to prohibit LGBT discrimination while also providing exceptions for churches, religious schools and ministers. The Indiana Family Institute, Indiana Family Action and the American Family Association of Indiana do not qualify for those exemptions.
The plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment was denied. Carmel’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and Bloomington’s motion to dismiss were also denied, but motions for summary judgment were granted.
The City of Columbus had filed a motion to dismiss early on in the case to avoid using taxpayer money to defend the lawsuit, but the judge would not dismiss it.
Whitted said the City of Columbus handled the case internally using its city attorneys to defend the case. Whitted Law, consisting of Alan Whitted, Alex Whitted and Teresha Whitted, billed the city $57,000 for its defense.
Whitted said Bopp Law Firm has 30 days from Nov. 21 to file for an appeal of the court’s findings. Jim Bopp of Bopp Law Firm was unavailable to comment at the time of publication.
The previously scheduled bench trial dates of Feb. 18-21have been vacated, according to the ruling.
