Two court rulings on Thursday strengthened protections for religious charities and businesses. These decisions shield faith-based organizations from federal mandates that violate their beliefs. They stand as a bulwark against progressive policies pushing transgender ideology.

In North Dakota, U.S. District Judge Peter Welte ruled that federal agencies cannot force healthcare providers to fund gender-transition procedures if it conflicts with their religious values. The Catholic Benefits Association, an order of Catholic nuns, and two Catholic care facilities filed the case in 2023. Welte, the chief federal judge in North Dakota, oversaw the proceedings.

The Biden administration’s 2024 policy redefined the Affordable Care Act’s Title IX ban on “sex” discrimination to include gender identity. Healthcare providers refusing “gender-affirming care” faced losing federal funding. Welte rejected this mandate, stating, “The case-by-case exemption procedure leaves religious organizations unable to predict their legal exposure without furthering any compelling antidiscrimination interests.”

Welte also prohibited the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from deeming it discriminatory for employers to exclude “gender-affirming care” from health plans. This protects religious employers from lawsuits. However, he dismissed the plaintiffs’ arguments on abortion and fertility treatments as “underdeveloped,” focusing solely on the transgender issue.

President Donald Trump’s 2025 executive order, recognizing only biological sex, not gender identity, set the stage for Welte’s ruling. The decision ensures religious healthcare providers and employers can uphold their faith without federal coercion. It reflects a broader effort to prioritize religious liberty over progressive demands.

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled the same day, protecting a Wisconsin Catholic Charities chapter from religious discrimination. The Wisconsin Supreme Court had denied the charity a tax exemption for religious nonprofits, arguing it served non-Catholics and did not proselytize. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned this, citing bias against the charity’s faith.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the decision, writing, “It is fundamental to our constitutional order that the government maintain neutrality between religion and religion.” She added, “There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one.” The ruling condemned subjective federal standards that penalized inclusive service.

The Supreme Court noted, “Simply put, petitioners could qualify for the exemption while providing their current charitable services if they engaged in proselytization or limited their services to fellow Catholics.” Catholic teaching, however, forbids “misus[ing] works of charity for purposes of proselytism,” making the denial discriminatory. This secures tax protections for religious charities.

These rulings counter Biden-era overreach that threatened religious organizations. Welte’s decision frees healthcare providers from funding procedures they oppose, while the Supreme Court ensures charities aren’t punished for serving all. Trump’s executive order reinforces this stance, rejecting gender identity mandates.

Conservatives view these decisions as a triumph for the First Amendment. They curb federal attempts to impose progressive ideologies on faith-based groups. The rulings affirm that religious liberty takes precedence over discriminatory mandates.

Republicans stand resolute in defending these protections. The courts’ actions safeguard constitutional principles, ensuring religious organizations can operate freely. These victories fortify faith against the left’s relentless push to erode traditional values.