Nuns Win: NY Retreats After Years Forcing Churches to Fund Abortions

Paul Riverbank, 1/21/2026After years in court, NY relents—religious groups win exemption from mandated abortion coverage.

Let’s rewind: It was 2017, and then-Governor Andrew Cuomo championed a new health insurance regulation. Under the policy, nearly all employers were required to cover “medically necessary abortion services” for employees—no copays, no caveats. Cuomo, a Catholic himself, justified the move as a way to cement unfettered reproductive access. The religious exemption, though, was so narrow that in practice, very few faith-based organizations could claim it.

Almost immediately, a patchwork of faith groups—Catholic dioceses, orders of Anglican sisters, Lutheran and Baptist churches, and their affiliated ministries—pushed back, launching legal challenges. Their argument was personal and constitutional: Government was coercing them, under threat of steep fines, to underwrite procedures they viewed as incompatible with their most deeply held beliefs. “For almost ten years, New York officials have tried to force nuns to bankroll abortions because they serve everyone in need,” said Lori Windham, the attorney leading their cause, capturing the frustration that defined many of the courtroom exchanges.

The legal ground at first was anything but favorable to these groups. New York’s lower courts sided with the state, dismissing the constitutional concerns raised by religious ministries. Yet the Supreme Court’s decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia in 2021 kicked the door open. The Justices declared that cities or states cannot treat faith groups worse simply because of their charitable missions. In their eyes, a renewed standard for “strict scrutiny” had emerged when government policies ran up against religious liberty claims.

Despite that, the local legal machinery in New York chugged along, upholding the abortion mandate even after Fulton. The faith groups, for their part, refused to retreat, taking their fight once again as high as it would go. The Supreme Court finally acted more assertively in June 2025: referencing its unanimous ruling in Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor, the Court sent New York’s own judiciary back to reconsider—with pointed language from Justice Sonia Sotomayor highlighting the constitutional pitfalls of governments differentiating between religious doctrines when making policy.

It was that rebuke, more than any legal technicality, that broke the stalemate. By Friday, state officials sat down at the negotiating table, dropped their push, and agreed to grant religious ministries immunity from the abortion coverage requirement. For groups like the Diocese of Albany, the 900 Sisters of St. Mary’s, and several conservative Protestant ministries, the terms provided not just relief but a public affirmation of their right to operate with fidelity to their teachings.

Windham, relieved by the outcome, said bluntly, “This confirms that you can’t punish ministries for living out their faith by welcoming everyone.”

But as New York steps aside, the bigger national argument is just ramping up elsewhere. Over in Virginia, a new confrontation is brewing. Lawmakers there have placed a “Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment” on the November ballot—a measure that, if adopted, would embed a sweeping guarantee to abortion and contraception within the state’s constitution. Catholic bishops, once more, are warning of unprecedented social consequences. “No one should ever be forced to pay for or participate in an abortion,” wrote Bishop Michael Burbidge, words echoing both defiance and fatigue from many in religious life.

With the November vote approaching, Virginia’s political temperature is rising. Meanwhile, the New York case continues to ripple outward. At stake isn’t just policy but a deeper question: In a country wrestling with pluralism, where does the line fall between communal convictions and individual rights? Today’s legal settlements, hard-fought and often unsatisfying to one side or another, lay out a new map—one dotted with courtrooms and, increasingly, shaped by voters at the ballot box.

For those who watched the ten-year New York struggle unfold, the message seems clear: battles over faith and reproductive rights are far from settled. As society grapples with these questions, each high-profile decision writes another chapter—reminding us that the intersection of private belief and public rule is never truly static.

After a decade marked by legal scuffles and philosophical standoffs, the State of New York has yielded in its effort to compel religious groups—including nuns and churches—to fund abortion services. The end did not arrive quietly. Instead, it was the result of an arduous legal slog underscored by changing tides within the Supreme Court.Let’s rewind: It was 2017, and then-Governor Andrew Cuomo championed a new health insurance regulation. Under the policy, nearly all employers were required to cover “medically necessary abortion services” for employees—no copays, no caveats. Cuomo, a Catholic himself, justified the move as a way to cement unfettered reproductive access. The religious exemption, though, was so narrow that in practice, very few faith-based organizations could claim it.Almost immediately, a patchwork of faith groups—Catholic dioceses, orders of Anglican sisters, Lutheran and Baptist churches, and their affiliated ministries—pushed back, launching legal challenges. Their argument was personal and constitutional: Government was coercing them, under threat of steep fines, to underwrite procedures they viewed as incompatible with their most deeply held beliefs. “For almost ten years, New York officials have tried to force nuns to bankroll abortions because they serve everyone in need,” said Lori Windham, the attorney leading their cause, capturing the frustration that defined many of the courtroom exchanges.The legal ground at first was anything but favorable to these groups. New York’s lower courts sided with the state, dismissing the constitutional concerns raised by religious ministries. Yet the Supreme Court’s decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia in 2021 kicked the door open. The Justices declared that cities or states cannot treat faith groups worse simply because of their charitable missions. In their eyes, a renewed standard for “strict scrutiny” had emerged when government policies ran up against religious liberty claims.Despite that, the local legal machinery in New York chugged along, upholding the abortion mandate even after Fulton. The faith groups, for their part, refused to retreat, taking their fight once again as high as it would go. The Supreme Court finally acted more assertively in June 2025: referencing its unanimous ruling in Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor, the Court sent New York’s own judiciary back to reconsider—with pointed language from Justice Sonia Sotomayor highlighting the constitutional pitfalls of governments differentiating between religious doctrines when making policy.It was that rebuke, more than any legal technicality, that broke the stalemate. By Friday, state officials sat down at the negotiating table, dropped their push, and agreed to grant religious ministries immunity from the abortion coverage requirement. For groups like the Diocese of Albany, the 900 Sisters of St. Mary’s, and several conservative Protestant ministries, the terms provided not just relief but a public affirmation of their right to operate with fidelity to their teachings.Windham, relieved by the outcome, said bluntly, “This confirms that you can’t punish ministries for living out their faith by welcoming everyone.”But as New York steps aside, the bigger national argument is just ramping up elsewhere. Over in Virginia, a new confrontation is brewing. Lawmakers there have placed a “Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment” on the November ballot—a measure that, if adopted, would embed a sweeping guarantee to abortion and contraception within the state’s constitution. Catholic bishops, once more, are warning of unprecedented social consequences. “No one should ever be forced to pay for or participate in an abortion,” wrote Bishop Michael Burbidge, words echoing both defiance and fatigue from many in religious life.With the November vote approaching, Virginia’s political temperature is rising. Meanwhile, the New York case continues to ripple outward. At stake isn’t just policy but a deeper question: In a country wrestling with pluralism, where does the line fall between communal convictions and individual rights? Today’s legal settlements, hard-fought and often unsatisfying to one side or another, lay out a new map—one dotted with courtrooms and, increasingly, shaped by voters at the ballot box.For those who watched the ten-year New York struggle unfold, the message seems clear: battles over faith and reproductive rights are far from settled. As society grapples with these questions, each high-profile decision writes another chapter—reminding us that the intersection of private belief and public rule is never truly static.