The Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne, who operate the 42-bed Rosary Hill Home hospice in Westchester County, have become the focal point of a legal clash over religious liberty and patient rights. Represented by the Colorado firm First & Fourteenth, with connections to other religious liberty groups, the sisters have asked a federal court to block enforcement of parts of a state statute signed in 2026 that affects long-term care facilities. The nursing community says its work — free end-of-life care rooted in Catholic practice — could be disrupted if they are required to adopt policies they view as contrary to their beliefs.
What the law requires
New York’s statute, formally titled the Long-Term Care Facility Residents’ Bill of Rights for LGBTQIA+ New Yorkers and People Living with HIV, includes a series of mandates for long-term care providers. Among the measures are directives to assign rooms and allow restroom access consistent with a resident’s gender identity, to respect a resident’s chosen name and preferred pronouns, and to provide periodic cultural competency training for staff. The law also emphasizes a resident’s ability to associate with others and to engage in consensual intimacy unless any restriction is applied uniformly and nondiscriminatorily. Supporters say these rules protect vulnerable residents; critics contend they can clash with conscience-based care.
The lawsuit and the nuns’ position
The Dominican Sisters, through attorney L. Martin Nussbaum and allied groups, contend the state has already signaled expectations for compliance by sending letters described by counsel as “warnings.” Those notices allegedly advised the Rosary Hill Home about room assignments, restroom access, and the use of names and pronouns for residents asserting a different gender than their biological sex. State records, however, show no formal complaints currently lodged against Rosary Hill, and the sisters’ legal team acknowledges the facility has not knowingly cared for any residents who identify as transgender. Still, the suit argues that potential enforcement could force the sisters to act against deeply held religious convictions.
Claims and legal arguments
The complaint advances free exercise and conscience-based claims, asserting that compliance with the law would require the sisters to affirm concepts they regard as theologically and anthropologically false. Counsel describes the training requirement as ideological “indoctrination” and posits that mandating staff to use particular pronouns or to assign rooms based on asserted gender identity infringes on religious expression. The sisters say they pursued a religious exemption similar to one previously granted to another faith-based entity but did not receive a response, prompting the preemptive federal filing to preserve their rights and the future of Rosary Hill’s ministry.
Care mission and daily practice
Rosary Hill Home is presented by supporters as a charitable institution devoted to terminal cancer patients, often for short hospice stays focused on comfort and spiritual care. The sisters describe the environment as shaped by prayer and sacramental presence and say their approach to caregiving depends on religious convictions about human dignity. Leaders have emphasized that their objective is not litigation for its own sake; as their lawyer put it, they would prefer to concentrate on ministering to the dying rather than litigating, while seeking legal assurances that their conscience rights will be respected.
Implications and next steps
This case touches on a broader national conversation about how anti-discrimination policies intersect with religious freedom in health care settings. Observers note the tension between protecting the rights of LGBTQIA+ and HIV-positive residents — who advocates deem especially vulnerable in institutional settings — and preserving conscience protections for faith-based providers. The litigation could clarify the scope of permissible exemptions or confirm the ways facilities must adapt. New York officials, including Governor Kathy Hochul, have framed the 2026 law as ensuring dignity and safety for seniors and vulnerable people, urging that “hate will never have a place in New York.” The court’s decision will likely shape whether and how similar institutions request and receive accommodations going forward.
Meanwhile, the Dominican Sisters and their backers continue to marshal moral and legal arguments, with public statements of support from religious bioethics groups and commentary in faith-focused publications. Among those weighing in, some authors referenced broader theological critiques of gender ideology, while public health advocates emphasize compliance, training, and nondiscrimination as essential to safe, respectful care. As litigation proceeds, Rosary Hill’s case will be watched by advocates on both sides as a test of how state policy and religious conscience coexist in long-term care.