(The Washington Stand) — Liberty University, one of the world’s largest Christian universities, is caught between a rock and a hard place. Or, in this case, between religious convictions and a federal judge who ruled in favor of a transgender-identifying employee.
As the university alleges, it wasn’t until after Jonathan Zinski was hired and completed his 90-day trial period that he decided to identify as a woman. Zinski confessed that he had been taking female hormones for months prior to his employment at the school and announced, after Liberty’s standard three-month employment probationary period, that he wanted to go by the name “Ellenor.”
Due to the school’s Bible-based religious conviction and Zinski’s decision to “deny [his] biological and chromosomal sex assigned at birth,” Liberty terminated him in 2023. However, it didn’t take long for this case to go to court, where it remains to this day.
In July 2024, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Virginia filed a lawsuit on behalf of Zinski, claiming Liberty’s action was “in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” The university made a motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that the First Amendment and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protected their decision. However, on Friday, a federal judge rejected their request and ruled that the lawsuit would move forward.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Norman Moon wrote, “Liberty cannot ‘erect a shield against antidiscrimination laws simply by asserting that mere acceptance of a member from a particular group would impair its message.’ Thus, … we conclude that Liberty’s continued employment of Zinksi does not significantly burden Liberty’s ability to maintain its views and associate for its expressed purposes.”
Additionally, the ruling stated that Zinski’s role, having not been one of “spiritual function,” meant that the First Amendment did not provide grounds for his firing. This, despite the fact that Liberty raised concerns about Zinski’s announcement conflicting with their “interpretation and application of Scripture.” As the document reads, “the Fourth Circuit has also emphasized that ‘[w]here no spiritual function is involved, the First Amendment does not stay the application of a generally applicable law such as Title VII to the religious employer.’”
Liberty Counsel, who is representing the university, wrote in a statement, “Liberty University will appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals a federal judge’s refusal to dismiss the meritless Title VII lawsuit.… Liberty University terminated Jonathan Zinski after he flagrantly and intentionally violated Liberty University’s doctrinal statement and policies.”
The counsel’s attorneys explained how “the history of this case shows that Jonathan Zinski attempted to set up Liberty University for this lawsuit.” As they wrote:
Four months before applying to Liberty University, he began taking female hormones. Yet, when hired in February 2023, Zinski agreed to adhere to the university’s doctrinal position regarding the biblical understanding of gender. Liberty University’s doctrinal statement clearly states that human beings were directly created in the very image of God as either biologically male or female from the womb, and it is a sinful act prohibited by God to deny one’s birth sex by self-identification with a different gender. Zinski acknowledged all of this despite knowing that he was four months into executing his plan to act in opposition to Liberty University’s doctrinal statement and employment requirements by denying his biological sex. As his 90-day probation ended, Zinski revealed his effort to identify as a different gender and then demanded Liberty University depart from its doctrine, sincerely held religious beliefs, and Christian mission.
Ultimately, the counsel stated, the “university’s decision to terminate Zinski was based on its religious values, and … Liberty University has the freedom not to associate with individuals, such as Zinski, whose religious beliefs and conduct are directly contrary to the vital religious mission in which Liberty University is engaged.” And as Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver put it, Liberty does have “the right under the First Amendment and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to uphold its sincere Christian religious beliefs and require its employees to do the same.”
“Zinski intentionally and deceptively set up Liberty University in an attempt to undermine its religious beliefs and mission,” he added, and therefore, this case “must be dismissed with prejudice.” Meg Kilgannon, Family Research Council’s senior fellow for Education Studies, shared with The Washington Stand that “Liberty University has been the target of these kinds of cases for years.” In fact, “most recently an activist group sued the college seeking to remove the Title IX religious exemption.”
“In those cases,” she added, “one could at least imagine that a student’s situation or beliefs could change regarding their ‘identity.’ But this case involves deception at the outset, as the plaintiff took cross-sex hormones before applying for this job. This seems like a great opportunity to correct the error made in the Bostock decision regarding sex and gender.”
David Closson, FRC’s director of the Center for Biblical Worldview, also chimed in. “Liberty University is entirely within their rights to terminate an employee who flagrantly violates the code of conduct of the university,” he said. “Liberty, founded by the late Jerry Farwell Sr., is one of the premier Christian Universities in the world, and has a reputation for their biblical fidelity.”
Ultimately, Closson observed, “the Bible is clear: there are only two sexes, and you cannot change your sex. This claim, brought by someone who appears to be a transgender activist, is meritless.” Moving forward, “the Fourth Circuit has an opportunity to clarify that the United States Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act protect Liberty University and allow it to operate according to its founding values, which include a commitment to biblical anthropology.”
READ: Washington state constitutional amendment seeks ‘right’ to abortion, gender transitions
As this case continues to unfold, Closson encouraged Christians to “pray for Liberty University and for the attorneys at Liberty Council, who are representing the school in this important First Amendment case.” In particular, “this case also highlights why legislation like the Equality Act, which would elevate contested claims of sexual orientation and gender identity to the level of a protected class, should never be passed into legislation.”
“Religious freedom is our first freedom,” he concluded, “and Americans of all faiths should understand the disastrous consequences that would ensue if religious colleges and universities were forced to violate their deeply held beliefs in matters of sexuality. If this transgender activist were to win, it would set a terrible precedent.”
This article is reprinted with permission from the Family Research Council, publishers of The Washington Stand at washingtonstand.com.
