Case in Point July/August 2025
July/August 2025A Christian Makeover for Public Education in Texas
In a major push to reshape the role of religion in public education, the Texas legislature has passed four bills blurring the constitutional line between church and state. Most prominently, SB 10 mandates that every public school classroom display a specific version of the Ten Commandments. Schools may use public funds or accept donated posters to comply.
Alongside that bill, SB 11 authorizes Texas school districts to implement daily periods of prayer or religious text reading, open to both students and staff. Participation requires written parental consent and a waiver of any right to sue under the establishment clause—a controversial move that raises serious constitutional red flags.
SB 965 asserts that school employees’ religious expression on duty is protected, unless the restriction meets a strict legal standard—potentially eroding the distinction between public employee speech and private religious practice.
Finally, SB 1049 mandates school policies allowing released-time religious instruction off-campus for one to five hours per week at parental request, with students responsible for missed classwork.
Supporters of the new laws argue they restore religious freedom in schools. But opponents—including advocates for religious liberty and church-state separation—warn these measures could coerce religious conformity, marginalize minority faiths, and invite litigation.
Together, the legislation marks one of the most aggressive recent efforts by a U.S. state to introduce structured religious practices into public education—a direction that many fear may violate long-standing constitutional protections designed to keep government neutral on matters of faith.
A Temporary High-water Mark for State Funding of Religious Schools
In a deadlocked 4-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a ruling from Oklahoma’s high court denying a public charter to St. Isidore Catholic Virtual School. With Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused, the tie leaves key constitutional questions open for future lawsuits.
St. Isidore, backed by Oklahoma’s Catholic dioceses, had an explicitly religious mission, and was intended to evangelize through online public education. State attorney general Gentner Drummond challenged the charter’s approval, arguing it violated constitutional bans on public funding of religious institutions.
Oklahoma’s supreme court agreed, ruling that charter schools are public and must remain secular. Funding a religiously operated school, it said, would breach both state constitutional provisions and the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s tie leaves unanswered whether charter schools are neutral public benefits or whether they are inherently state actors. Similar cases are expected to return to the Court—with Justice Barrett likely participating next time.
Supreme Court Declines to Hear Apache Sacred Land Case
The U.S. Supreme Court will not review Apache Stronghold v. United States, thus letting stand a Ninth Circuit ruling that allows the federal government to transfer Oak Flat—sacred land to the Western Apache—to a copper mining company.
The narrow 6-5 appellate ruling found that the land transfer did not violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), despite Oak Flat’s religious significance.
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, issued a strongly worded dissent, calling the Court’s refusal to hear the case a “grave mistake” that would echo for generations. “We owe the Apaches no less” than a full hearing, he wrote, comparing the site’s religious significance to that of a cathedral.
Religious liberty advocates view the decision as a troubling signal that Indigenous religious rights remain vulnerable under U.S. law.
Canadian Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Québec’s Religious Symbols Ban
Canada’s highest court has agreed to hear a major challenge to Québec’s Bill 21, which bars public employees such as teachers and judges from wearing religious symbols at work. Critics argue the law particularly targets Muslim women and institutionalizes discrimination.
The case also puts under scrutiny the “notwithstanding clause” of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Québec invoked the clause to shield Bill 21 from constitutional review, preemptively overriding protections for religious freedom and equality.
Religious liberty advocates in Canada see this posing a key question: can governments sidestep fundamental rights through legislative fiat. The case could set lasting precedent for the balance between secular governance and minority rights.
Anti-Semitic Violence Surges
Anti-Semitic incidents in the United States have spiked dramatically since the Israel-Hamas war began in October 2023. According to the Anti-Defamation League, incidents surged 361 percent in the following three months—a trend that has continued into 2025.
One third of American Jews say they’ve personally experienced anti-Semitism during the past year, and more than half report altering their behavior out of fear. Recent attacks underscore the danger: in May, two Israeli embassy workers were killed outside Washington, D.C.’s Capital Jewish Museum; less than two weeks later a man attacked a rally in Colorado with a flamethrower.
Experts cite rising online hate, educational gaps in religious literacy, and increased political violence as contributing factors. Younger Americans, exposed to misinformation and social media influencers, are more likely to endorse anti-Semitic tropes.
Advocates warn that these attacks are part of a broader erosion of pluralism. Unless met with serious educational and civic leadership, this trend may deepen.
Confidence in Free Speech Tied to Political Power, Study Finds
While Americans broadly support free speech, a recent study from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) shows that confidence in free-speech protections varies by political power. When their preferred party is in control, Americans are more likely to believe their rights will be respected; when it’s not, that belief drops.
The findings reveal a troubling politicization of constitutional rights. Though free speech remains a unifying ideal, many Americans view its enforcement as partisan. For defenders of religious liberty and expression, the study is a stark reminder: constitutional protections must be upheld consistently, regardless of who governs.