A State Judge has ruled that an Illinois county must pay over $370,000 in attorney’s fees for requiring a Christian nurse to refer women for abortions and offer abortifacient contraceptives.
Sandra Rojas had worked as a pediatric nurse for 18 years in Winnebago County Health Department but she and other nurses were mandated to undergo training that involved learning about abortion referrals and abortifacient contraceptives in 2015.
Rojas objected and said her Christian faith did not permit her to offer abortion services. Though her supervisor offered her temporary religious accommodation, she was told that the training and the abortion-related services were needed to work in her position.
Rojas resigned and later sued the county, alleging it had violated her freedom of religion and freedom of conscience rights.
Judge Eugene G. Doherty of the 17th Judicial Circuit was on Rojas’ side and ruled that the department “improperly discriminated” against Rojas “by refusing to accommodate her objections of conscience.”
The Judgd ruled that the department had violated the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act.
Recently, Doherty ordered the county to pay $374,104 in attorney’s fees.
Alliance Defending Freedom served as co-counsel in the case alongside Noel Sterett of Dalton & Tomich and Whitman Brisky of Mauck & Baker.
ADF senior counsel Kevin Theriot said: “Medical professionals should never be forced to engage in or promote activities that violate their beliefs or convictions.
“Sandra served as a nurse according to her conscience and religion – a right for medical providers that is protected under Illinois and federal law. The court’s fee award sends a clear message that health care workers are free to practice medicine in a manner consistent with their conscience and religious beliefs, and there will be a steep penalty if the government fails to respect that legally protected freedom.”
According to Doherty, the case presents “legitimate interests in conflict.” Rojas “had a right” to have her objections honored, and the county “had the right” to run its clinic.
He ruled that the county offered Rojas a position in a nursing home but the county “could have reasonably accommodated” her “without removing her from her job.”
He added that the clinic would have worked efficiently even with her objections.
