A final federal court order allows Jessica Bates to pursue adoption without being compelled to use language about sexuality and gender that conflicts with her Christian beliefs.
Oregon child-welfare officials have agreed to rescind their rejection of Jessica Bates’ application to become an adoptive parent and allow the widowed mother of five to resume the certification process without surrendering her religious convictions.
U.S. District Judge Adrienne Nelson entered the stipulated order and final judgment on September 9, resolving the three-year First Amendment lawsuit known as Bates v. Wendt.
Under the order, the Oregon Department of Human Services may not deny Bates’ application because of her beliefs that sexual activity belongs within marriage between one man and one woman and that people should live consistently with their biological sex.
The agency also may not require Bates to use prescribed language—including chosen pronouns—that would express views about sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression contrary to those beliefs as a condition of certification.
The judgment identifies Bates as the prevailing party and says she is entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs, with the amount to be determined later.
Application Rejected After Conflict Over State Rule
Bates, an ultrasound technician raising five children in Malheur County, began the certification process because she hoped to adopt siblings from Oregon’s foster-care system.
“As a widowed mom of five, I was surprised to feel God nudging me to adopt,” Bates said in a statement released by Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented her.
Oregon required prospective adoptive parents to “respect, accept and support” a child’s sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.
Bates said she would love and care for any child placed in her home but could not affirm beliefs about sex and gender that contradicted her Christian convictions. She also objected to using pronouns inconsistent with a child’s biological sex or facilitating medical gender-transition procedures.
The state denied her application in 2022 under Oregon Administrative Rule 413-200-0308(2)(k), making her ineligible for any placement—including an infant or a child who shared her beliefs.
Oregon defended its rule as a means of “protecting” LGBTQ-identified children and ensuring that foster and adoptive parents could meet their individual needs.
Ninth Circuit Sided With Bates
Bates filed her federal lawsuit in April 2023. A district court initially declined to block the rule, finding that Oregon had a strong interest in protecting LGBTQ children in state care.
In July 2025, however, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed that decision and concluded that Bates was likely to succeed on her First Amendment claims.
The two-judge majority found that Oregon had not adequately explained why less restrictive approaches—such as evaluating placements individually—could not protect children without categorically excluding Bates.
The majority included one judge appointed by President Trump and another appointed by President Bill Clinton. A third judge dissented, arguing that the requirement primarily regulated parental conduct necessary to protect children rather than constitutionally protected speech.
Oregon subsequently agreed to preliminary relief allowing Bates to restart the application process. The final stipulated judgment makes the protections permanent and closes the case.
What the Final Order Does—and Does Not Do
The order requires Oregon officials to reinstate Bates’ application or permit her to reapply. They may not categorically disqualify her from any placement because of her beliefs or her desire to speak and parent consistently with them.
The judgment preserves Oregon’s authority to evaluate each potential placement individually. Officials may consider a particular child’s needs and a prospective parent’s willingness or ability to meet those needs, including issues involving sexual orientation and gender identity.
The final order directly governs Oregon’s treatment of Bates. It should not be characterized as a court order automatically eliminating every Oregon foster-care standard for all applicants.
Why This Matters
Government has a responsibility to and for the people and that responsibility does not give officials unlimited authority to compel prospective parents to express state-approved beliefs or to exclude an otherwise qualified family through a categorical religious test.
Individualized placement decisions offer a careful approach: officials can evaluate a child’s actual needs and a family’s ability to provide safe, loving care without assuming that traditional Christian convictions make someone unfit to parent.
The case is especially significant because the Ninth Circuit’s published First Amendment ruling may influence similar disputes throughout the Western states.
THRIVE! Perspective
There is no better or safer home than that of a true Christian where children can hear about their true identity as a child of God and the love of Jesus Christ. James 1:27 describes caring for orphans in their distress as an expression of pure religion. Christians who are willing to open their homes, resources and lives to children who need safety, stability and enduring love should be honored and respected.
