There’s been much talk of the rule of law in recent weeks by Democrats in their failed effort to remove President Trump from office.
Their articles claimed abuse of power and obstruction of Congress but did not allege a specific crime.
Now, in Michigan, a state agency says it is investigating something that isn’t even illegal.
A lawsuit challenging the investigation has been filed by the Great Lakes Justice Center on behalf of Rouch World Events Center in Sturgis, Michigan, a wedding venue run by the Rouch brothers.
The scenario by now is familiar: The Christian brothers declined, based on their faith, to host a same-sex wedding at their facility, and the unsuccessful applicants complained.
In response, the Michigan Department of Civil Rights launched an inquiry demanding that the brothers “answer interrogatories and produce numerous documents.”
But the brothers’ lawsuit argued Michigan’s Civil Rights Law, the Elliott-Larsen Act, does not include discrimination categories for sexual orientation or gender identity.
That leaves the state agency with “no authority to even investigate or accept complaints based on those categories,” the complaint contends.
The complaint filed in the Michigan Court of Claims asks for an injunction to stop the state agency’s “illegal and unconstitutional investigation.”
Two women had complained they were discriminated against by the family-owned business.
Rouch World also is asking that the court rule that the state officials “cannot investigate claimed violations of Michigan’s civil rights law for the categories of sexual orientation and gender identity because they are not included under Michigan law.”
“The MDCR is discriminating against Rouch World by prosecuting these baseless complaints despite the sincere religious beliefs of the company,” according to a statement from the legal team.
The venue had agreed to allow a reception because the wedding would be at another location, but then the same-sex couple changed plans and insisted that Rouch World hold the wedding, too.
“The company respectfully declined because of their sincerely held religious beliefs on the issue. As a result, the couple decided to hold their wedding elsewhere, and Rouch World refunded their entire deposit, including a portion that was non-refundable under the contract,” the legal team said.
David A. Kallman, senior counsel with the Great Lakes Justice Center, said: “My client’s religious beliefs should be treated with tolerance and respect. Rouch World is owned and operated by devout Christians who seek to operate their small, family-owned company in accordance with their sincerely held religious beliefs, without vilification or punishment from the government for holding to those beliefs.
“My client wishes the couple nothing but the best. However, this legally and factually frivolous prosecution and intolerance of my clients’ religious beliefs clearly demonstrates hostility and discrimination towards my client’s rights under both the United States and Michigan Constitutions. These complaints are without merit and should be dismissed.”
The complaint notes that the legislature did not include sexual orientation and gender identity in its law. But bureaucrats in the state Civil Rights Commission, “under the guise of an interpretive statement … abused its power by redefining the word ‘sex’ to now include sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Similarly, the Obama administration tried to impose gender-neutral restrooms and showers on public schools. But the order was immediately reversed when President Trump took office.
The complaint states, “Defendants are attempting to improperly conduct an investigation based upon an allegation not prohibited by ELCRA, i.e., a person or business declining to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony.
“Defendants improperly claim that a person or business declining to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony is a prohibited form of ‘sex’ discrimination … ‘Sexual orientation’ is not encompassed by the word ‘sex’ and is therefore not protected.
“Declining to participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies equally applies to both female/female and male/male marriages; thus, such a declination cannot be based on ‘sex’ and is instead based upon sincerely held religious beliefs regarding the religious ceremony itself.”
Defendants are the Michigan Department of Civil Rights and interim director Mary Engelman.
The suit seeks a judgment that “sex” in state law means biological sex and that “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” are not included in protected classes. It also seeks rulings that the state has no authority to accept such complaints or investigate them.
The venue owners also want relief from the state’s demands that they answer legal interrogatories.
The Great Lakes Justice Center already last summer had warned the state agency about its “hostility and discrimination” against the wedding venue that it accused of violating the state’s “sexual stereotyping” standard.
Rouch World had been targeted by a complaint filed by Natalie Johnson of Burr Oak.
She claimed she was “discriminated on the basis of sex, female, for not conforming to sex stereotypes about how women are expected to present themselves in my physical appearance, actions, and/or behaviors.”
At the time, Rouch’s lawyers argued the venue has “no policies about how a personal should or shouldn’t act, dress, talk, etc, due to his/her sex.”
The complaint also cites the U.S. Supreme Court in its Obergefell decision that created same-sex “marriage.”
“It must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered.”
