Religious freedom advocates and lawyers representing 22 state attorneys general have filed friend-of-the-court briefs on behalf of two Vermont families who lost their foster care licenses because their Biblical views on sexuality conflicted with new state requirements.
Brian and Kaitlyn Wuoti and Michael and Rebecca Gantt, who were formerly licensed by the state of Vermont as foster parents, were deemed “unqualified” by the state. They are appealing their cases to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after a federal district court upheld Vermont’s decision. They are represented by attorneys from Alliance Defending Freedom, which filed its opening brief with the 2nd Circuit on May 30 in the case, Wuoti v. Winters. Brian Wuoti and Michael Gantt are also Christian pastors.
In 2023, Vermont officials began requiring that all foster parents support a child’s self-proclaimed LGBTQ identity. An email that was sent from the state’s Department of Children and Families to foster parents read: “Eligibility for licensure is dependent on foster parents and applicants being able to support youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, or another diverse identity (LGBTQI+) even if the foster parents hold divergent personal opinions or beliefs.”
After the couples informed state officials of their beliefs, the state revoked the licenses of both families—the Wuotis in 2022 before the mandate was official, and the Gantts in 2024. The state acted even though, according to their attorneys, both families had been lauded by state foster officials prior to the sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) requirement as “wonderful,” “kind,” “amazing” and “welcoming.”
“Vermont’s foster-care system is in crisis: There aren’t enough families to care for vulnerable kids,” said ADF Senior Counsel Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse. “As numerous states have attested, religious families play a critical role in the foster-care system. Yet instead of inviting families from diverse backgrounds to help care for vulnerable kids, Vermont is shutting the door on them, putting its ideological agenda ahead of the needs of suffering kids.”
ADF has argued that the state’s mandate regarding LGBTQ ideology constitutes compelled speech under the First Amendment because it requires foster parents to use children’s preferred pronouns and affirm a child’s self-proclaimed gender identity in other ways, such as attending Pride parades. It has also argued that the department’s mandates violate the families’ free exercise of religion by substantially burdening them to go against their sincerely held religious beliefs.
Among those filing friend-of-the-court briefs in the case was First Liberty Institute, another nationally prominent religious liberty law firm that, like ADF, has argued cases in federal appellate courts and at the Supreme Court.
“The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment guarantees that individuals can live according to their faith and the government cannot discriminate based on religion when it operates government programs,” said Tiffany Dunkin, legal fellow at First Liberty. “Revoking the foster care license of two caring families because of their religious views is blatant religious discrimination.”
Additionally, when government restricts First Amendment guarantees, it must demonstrate a “compelling government interest” and be carried out by the “least restrictive means.”
In the brief, the attorneys state, “Completely excluding from becoming foster parents those who cannot affirm a child’s sexual orientation or gender identity for religious reasons cannot be the least restrictive means for any legitimate interest. The foster child placement mechanism already allows the State to make individual assessments to ensure it places children with the best-suited foster parents. Thus, the State does not have to give blanket refusals of foster parent licenses to applicants like the Wuotis and the Gantts.”
Brian and Kaitlyn Wuoti and four of their children. (Screenshot via Facebook)