EDITOR’S NOTE: You can listen to this story by clicking the link above.
The Texas Supreme Court ruled on June 27 that a lawsuit against the Institute for Basic Life Principles (IBLP) and its founder Bill Gothard could continue, despite the defendants’ petition to dismiss the lawsuit under the First Amendment and the Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine.
In the original lawsuit, Phoebe Merritt and Abigail Doty allege that from approximately 1996 through 2011 their brother, Samuel Grant, sexually abused Merritt, and their father, Stanley Grant, sexually abused both Merritt and Doty. Among other assertions, Merritt and Doty alleged “civil conspiracy” against the Grants, Gothard, and IBLP.
Merritt and Doty claim that IBLP constitutes a cult that teaches distorted and heretical Christian doctrines, grooms girls to be available to sexual assault, and “indoctrinated boys and young men into the Gothard/IBLP sex abuse cult, teaching them to abuse and to overlook abuse.”
Gothard resigned from IBLP in 2014 after allegations of sexual harassment. In 2015, over 10 plaintiffs alleged “sexual, physical, and psychological abuse by Gothard and his organization” in a civil suit.
These allegations resurfaced in 2022 after an NBC News report and a public statement preemptively posted by IBLP ahead of the report’s release, as reported by Ministry Watch.
The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the 2015 lawsuit due to a threatened countersuit, emotional toll, and revictimization throughout the lawsuit process, according to three former plaintiffs in a counterstatement to IBLP’s statement.
Attempting to dismiss the recent lawsuit from Merritt and Doty, Gothard and IBLP petitioned for writ of mandamus, arguing the case should be dismissed because it violates the Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine. Grounded in the First Amendment’s Free Exercise clause, this legal principle says that courts should not decide on religious matters, including issues regarding theological controversy, church governance, or internal church discipline.
In the dissenting opinion, Chief Justice James D. Blacklock supported Gothard’s petition, arguing that “Texas courts can and should impose liability on the perpetrators of such terrible crimes” but that this lawsuit should be dismissed because it includes Gothard and IBLP.
According to Blacklock’s dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Devine and Sullivan, the lawsuit contains no allegation that Gothard or any high-ranking member of IBLP knew the family or had any knowledge of abuse that took place within the family. Therefore, the primary allegation connecting Gothard and IBLP to “the awful crimes the plaintiffs suffered” is that Gothard’s teachings—specifically on patriarchal authority and the duty of loyalty owed by children—are “intended to create and has created ideal victims for sexual assault.”
Blacklock argues that the only way to rule on this allegation is to decide whether Gothard’s teachings are biblical, so the court should dismiss the case.
The winning argument asserted the court does not need to analyze the truth of any of Gothard or IBLP’s teachings because the allegations from Merritt and Doty focus on the conduct carried out within the organization. “There is not a single element of sexual assault that requires analysis into the truth or falsity of Gothard or IBLP’s religious doctrine against Gothard or IBLP.”
Ultimately, the court denied the dismissal request, allowing Merritt and Doty to continue pursuing the lawsuit against the perpetrators of their assault, Gothard, IBLP, and the International A.L.E.R.T. Academy.
TO OUR READERS: The mission of MinistryWatch is to help Christian donors become more faithful stewards of the resources God has entrusted to them. Do you know of a story that will help us fulfill our mission, or do you want to give us feedback about this or any other story? If so, please email us at info@ministrywatch.com.
Access to MinistryWatch content is free. However, we hope you will support our work with your prayers and financial gifts. To make a donation, click here.