ST. PAUL – State Rep. Bernie Perryman, R-St. Augusta, said House Republicans took a major step toward restoring religious freedom which Minnesota Democrats stripped from faith-based organizations last year.
The House on Tuesday approved a variation of Republican legislation, amending the Minnesota Human Rights Act to re-establish protections for religious entities against discrimination claims. The bill unanimously passed the Senate earlier in the day and, with the House also providing unopposed approval, it now is on Gov. Tim Walz’s desk for enactment.
“It’s a good day for Minnesotans and our constitutional rights regarding religious freedom,” Perryman said. “The fact the legislation we passed cleared both bodies without opposition shows it addressed the concerns of everyone involved. I can’t thank members of the faith community enough for their participation in this process and the help they provided in crafting a bipartisan solution on this issue.”
Perryman said Tuesday’s action was necessary due to HRA legislation Democrats enacted in 2023, eliminating religious protections that had been in place since 1993. Before last year, when gender identity was included (or subsumed) within the MHRA definition of sexual orientation, the still-existing religious exemption for sexual orientation covered gender identity claims as well. When a new, separate definition of gender identity was created last year, there was no corresponding religious exemption added.
“Our job as legislators is to do what’s best for the people we represent and, in this case, it involved revisiting some misguided decisions that were made last year,” Perryman said. “I’m just pleased we took care of this problem now so faith-based institutions can continue making decisions in line with their mission and values.”
Perryman said she is confident the courts ultimately would have ruled the change Democrats made last year unconstitutional. She also indicated she’s glad it didn’t get that far.
“I’m glad this didn’t drag out in a major court case that ended up leaving everyone involved suffering damages,” Perryman said. “This includes taxpayers, who could have been stuck paying for legal fees used to defend a case they don’t want to defend in the first place.”
-30-