LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) — A law sold as protecting civil rights is now being tested on a simpler question: can the state tell a pro-life organization it must hire people who oppose its mission?

Right to Life of Michigan filed suit on Feb. 6  in federal court challenging 2023 changes to the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act that expanded the definition of sex to include protections tied to abortion. 

MORE NEWS: Michigan-Linked Lawsuit Exposes DOJ’s Growing Case Backlog Problem

The group says the update effectively strips pro-life organizations of the ability to screen employees for alignment with their core beliefs.

The lawsuit, brought alongside the Pregnancy Resource Center (PRC) and represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, names Attorney General Dana Nessel, the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, and members of the Civil Rights Commission as defendants.

According to the complaint, Right to Life dropped a standard hiring question asking applicants to explain their support for the organization’s mission after the law changed, fearing that even asking could trigger liability.

The suit also challenges the Legislature’s repeal of the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act, arguing the move pressures pro-life employers to provide abortion coverage despite moral objections.

Right to Life and PRC say the suit is necessary to continue serving Michiganders “without diluting their pro-life views through the lukewarm or hostile hires Michigan’s law demands.”