Religion Clause covers the suit here.
This case poses some interesting issues that I’ll keep an eye on. Three things to note. First, this is a rule that has nothing to do with government funding. The agency has never accepted state funding. So this is a prohibition on the agency doing business with private funds in the manner it and its funders see fit based on their religious beliefs.
Second, the agency is challenging prohibitions against discriminating both same-sex couples and unmarried couples or single people. It refuses to place children with unmarried people and married same-sex couples based on its religious beliefs.
Third, placing children in families is a social service. Unlike the wedding vendors like bakers, florists, and photographers, this seems a more central aspect of religious practice.