Christian Nationalism and the Supreme Court
- NOTOC**
Christian Nationalism and the Supreme Court
Christian nationalism and the United States Supreme Court intersect in debates over religious liberty, church-state separation, public education, abortion, LGBTQ rights, government funding of religious institutions, and the role of Christianity in American public life. The relationship is complex. Christian nationalism is a political and cultural ideology concerning the relationship between Christianity and national identity, while Supreme Court decisions arise from constitutional disputes involving specific laws, litigants, and legal doctrines. A judicial ruling favorable to a religious claimant therefore does not by itself establish that the Court or its justices embrace Christian nationalism.
Nevertheless, scholars, journalists, legal advocates, and political scientists have increasingly examined whether changes in Supreme Court doctrine have advanced goals also supported by Christian-right and Christian-nationalist organizations. The sources collected on this topic present contrasting interpretations. Some describe the Roberts Court as facilitating a political and legal movement seeking a larger role for Christianity in public institutions. Others characterize the same decisions primarily as protecting religious neutrality, free speech, institutional autonomy, and equal treatment of religious and secular organizations.
The debate reflects a broader transformation in American constitutional law. During much of the twentieth century, major church-state disputes often centered on preventing government establishment or sponsorship of religion. During the twenty-first century, Supreme Court litigation has increasingly focused on whether religious individuals and institutions are being improperly excluded from public benefits, restricted in religious expression, or denied exemptions available to comparable secular activities.
Christian Nationalism and the Christian Legal Movement
Christian nationalism generally connects Christianity with ideas about American national identity, history, political legitimacy, and public institutions. Researchers distinguish it from ordinary Christian belief, religious conservatism, patriotism, or political participation by Christians. People can hold conservative religious beliefs without embracing Christian nationalism, and Christians participate across the political spectrum.
A significant portion of the literature examines what scholars describe as a long-term Christian-right legal movement. Beginning in the late twentieth century, conservative religious organizations increasingly used litigation, legal education, judicial appointments, public-interest law firms, and constitutional advocacy to influence American law.
Organizations such as Alliance Defending Freedom, First Liberty Institute, and other religious-liberty organizations have participated in major Supreme Court disputes concerning abortion, public prayer, LGBTQ rights, public accommodations, religious schools, parental rights, and government regulation.
Some scholarship also examines relationships among Christian legal organizations, the Federalist Society, conservative legal networks, originalist constitutional theory, and Republican presidential administrations. These relationships are not identical, and the organizations involved frequently have different institutional purposes and legal philosophies. Nevertheless, their combined influence has become an important subject in research on judicial politics.
Christian-right legal organizations generally describe their work as protecting constitutional freedoms, particularly religious exercise and freedom of speech. Critics argue that some litigation strategies can weaken church-state separation or allow religious exemptions to override other civil-rights protections.
The Roberts Court and Religious Liberty
John Roberts became Chief Justice in 2005. During the Roberts Court era, the Supreme Court has issued a series of decisions expanding protections for religious individuals and organizations in several areas of constitutional and statutory law.
The Court has increasingly emphasized that government ordinarily may not discriminate against people or institutions because they are religious. This principle has become especially important when religious institutions seek access to generally available government programs.
The Court has also strengthened protections for religious expression, religious organizations' employment decisions, and workplace religious accommodations. These developments represent a substantial transformation of the legal environment surrounding religious liberty.
Supporters generally view these decisions as enforcing constitutional neutrality: government should neither favor nor disfavor religious citizens because of their faith.
Critics contend that the accumulating decisions may produce preferential outcomes for religious claimants or weaken protections originally associated with the Establishment Clause.
This disagreement is central to the debate over whether the Roberts Court's jurisprudence should be understood primarily as a religious-liberty development, a conservative constitutional transformation, an accommodationist approach to church-state relations, or a development connected to broader Christian-right and Christian-nationalist politics.
From the Lemon Test to History and Tradition
One of the most consequential developments involves the Establishment Clause.
For decades, courts frequently relied on the framework associated with Lemon v. Kurtzman. Under the Lemon test, government action was evaluated by considering its secular purpose, its primary effect on religion, and whether it created excessive government entanglement with religion.
The Supreme Court gradually reduced its reliance on Lemon. In American Legion v. American Humanist Association in 2019, the Court relied heavily on history and tradition when allowing a longstanding cross-shaped war memorial to remain on public land.
The transformation became especially clear in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District in 2022. The Court ruled for a public high-school football coach who prayed on the field after games and stated that Establishment Clause questions should be analyzed with reference to historical practices and understandings rather than the Lemon and endorsement tests.
The shift toward history and tradition has significant consequences. Courts must increasingly determine whether disputed government practices resemble historically accepted relationships between religion and government.
Supporters argue that this approach is more faithful to the original understanding of the First Amendment.
Critics argue that historical practices can reflect periods when religious minorities and nonreligious Americans possessed less political influence and that historical analysis can therefore provide uncertain guidance for a modern, religiously diverse society.
Public Prayer and Religious Expression
Public prayer has repeatedly brought questions of national identity, Christianity, and constitutional law before the Supreme Court.
Earlier decisions drew important boundaries around government-sponsored religious exercises. Engel v. Vitale in 1962 prohibited state-composed prayer in public schools, while Abington School District v. Schempp in 1963 struck down government-sponsored Bible reading and devotional exercises.
Later decisions permitted some forms of religious expression when grounded in historical tradition or private speech.
In Marsh v. Chambers in 1983, the Court upheld legislative prayer based largely on its long historical pedigree. Town of Greece v. Galloway in 2014 similarly permitted prayers before town meetings.
Kennedy v. Bremerton became a major contemporary turning point because the Court treated the coach's prayer as protected private religious expression rather than government-sponsored religion.
The decision illustrates a recurring constitutional tension: government must avoid establishing religion while also avoiding discrimination against private religious expression.
Religious Schools and Public Funding
Another major transformation concerns government funding and religious education.
Earlier interpretations of church-state separation often encouraged governments to maintain substantial distance between public funding and religious institutions. Recent Supreme Court decisions increasingly emphasize that when government creates a generally available benefit program, religious institutions ordinarily cannot be excluded simply because they are religious.
In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer in 2017, the Court ruled that Missouri could not exclude a church from a generally available playground-resurfacing grant solely because of its religious status.
In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue in 2020, the Court held that Montana could not exclude religious schools from a scholarship program available to other private schools.
In Carson v. Makin in 2022, the Court ruled that Maine could not exclude religious schools from a tuition-assistance program available to other private schools.
Together, these decisions strengthened the constitutional principle that religious organizations generally must receive equal treatment when governments distribute otherwise available public benefits.
Supporters characterize this doctrine as protection against religious discrimination.
Critics argue that it has narrowed the ability of states to maintain stronger separation between public funds and religious education.
Religious Charter Schools
The debate over public financing of religious education reached another stage through litigation involving Oklahoma's proposed St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School.
The dispute raised a fundamental constitutional question: whether a publicly funded charter school could itself be religious, rather than merely a private religious institution participating in a neutral benefit program.
The Supreme Court considered Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond in 2025. Because Justice Amy Coney Barrett did not participate, the Court divided evenly, leaving the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling against the religious charter school in place without establishing a nationwide Supreme Court precedent.
The controversy demonstrates that significant questions remain about where equal treatment of religious institutions ends and governmental establishment of religion begins.
Religious Exemptions and LGBTQ Rights
Conflicts between religious-liberty claims and LGBTQ antidiscrimination protections have generated some of the most prominent Supreme Court disputes of the twenty-first century.
In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission in 2018, the Court ruled narrowly for a baker who objected on religious grounds to creating a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The decision emphasized that government officials must remain neutral toward religious beliefs, while leaving many broader questions unresolved.
In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia in 2021, the Court ruled for Catholic Social Services in a dispute involving foster-care certification and same-sex couples. The decision again strengthened protections for religious organizations while avoiding a sweeping reconsideration of all religious-exemption law.
In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis in 2023, the Court held that Colorado could not compel a website designer to create expressive material celebrating same-sex marriages when doing so would conflict with her beliefs. The ruling primarily rested on freedom of speech rather than the Free Exercise Clause.
Supporters describe these decisions as protecting conscience and expression.
Civil-rights advocates have expressed concern that broad religious or expressive exemptions could weaken generally applicable nondiscrimination protections.
The cases demonstrate that disputes commonly described as religious-liberty cases may involve several constitutional principles at the same time, including free speech, free exercise, equality, and government neutrality.
Religious Organizations and Employment
The Court has also strengthened the constitutional autonomy of religious organizations in employment decisions.
In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC in 2012, the Court unanimously recognized a constitutional "ministerial exception" preventing certain employment-discrimination lawsuits involving ministers.
In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru in 2020, the Court broadened the doctrine by emphasizing employees' religious functions rather than relying only on formal ministerial titles.
These decisions protect the ability of religious organizations to select individuals who perform important religious roles.
Supporters view the ministerial exception as essential to church autonomy and freedom from government interference.
Critics and legal scholars continue to debate how broadly the exception should apply and which employees should qualify.
Workplace Religious Accommodation
Religious-liberty doctrine has also developed outside constitutional litigation.
In Groff v. DeJoy in 2023, the Supreme Court strengthened protections for employees seeking religious accommodations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
The case involved a postal worker who requested accommodation from Sunday work because of his religious beliefs. The Court rejected the longstanding interpretation under which employers could deny accommodation when it imposed more than a minimal cost.
After Groff, employers generally must demonstrate substantially increased costs in relation to their business before establishing undue hardship.
The decision illustrates the broader growth of religious-accommodation protections while also demonstrating that religious-liberty disputes are not limited to Christian nationalist politics.
Religious accommodation laws protect Americans belonging to many faith traditions as well as minority religious groups whose practices may conflict with standard workplace schedules or policies.
Abortion, Dobbs, and the Christian Right
Abortion represents another major point of intersection between conservative Christianity, judicial politics, and the Supreme Court.
Opposition to abortion became a central component of the modern Christian right during the late twentieth century. Conservative religious organizations participated extensively in political campaigns, judicial-selection debates, public advocacy, and litigation intended to limit or overturn Roe v. Wade.
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization in 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe and concluded that the Constitution does not itself confer a right to abortion, returning substantial regulatory authority to elected governments.
Because conservative Christian organizations had sought Roe's reversal for decades, Dobbs represented the achievement of a major objective shared by much of the Christian right.
Researchers disagree, however, about how the relationship should be interpreted. Some scholars connect Dobbs to a larger Christian-right project involving judicial appointments, originalism, and narratives about American history. The Court's majority opinion itself based its constitutional analysis on legal history and substantive-due-process doctrine rather than declaring a religious rationale.
Post-Dobbs litigation has also demonstrated that religion does not produce a single position on abortion. Jewish plaintiffs and members of other religious traditions have challenged abortion restrictions by arguing that some laws conflict with their own religious beliefs.
This illustrates an important distinction between protecting religious freedom generally and adopting one particular religious understanding through public law.
Christian Nationalism and Perceptions of the Court
Recent political-science research has examined how Christian nationalist beliefs shape public attitudes toward the Supreme Court.
Studies included in the source collection investigate whether Americans who strongly connect Christianity with American national identity evaluate the Court differently from Americans who reject that connection.
This research is significant because legitimacy depends partly on whether citizens perceive judicial decisions as applications of constitutional law rather than extensions of political or religious movements.
Survey research has also found changing public perceptions of the Court's relationship with religion. Following several major decisions involving prayer, religious schools, abortion, and religious exemptions, a growing portion of Americans described the Court as friendly toward religion.
Such perceptions do not establish the motivations of individual justices. They instead demonstrate how judicial decisions can become incorporated into broader political debates about religion, national identity, and constitutional authority.
Originalism, History, and Christian Nationalism
Originalism has become increasingly important in Supreme Court constitutional interpretation and in conservative legal thought.
Originalist approaches generally seek to interpret constitutional provisions according to their original public meaning or historical understanding.
Christian-right legal organizations have often supported originalism, but originalism is not inherently a Christian nationalist theory. Its advocates include scholars and judges whose arguments are grounded primarily in theories of constitutional interpretation rather than religious identity.
The relationship becomes controversial when competing historical narratives are used to describe the United States as either fundamentally Christian or constitutionally committed to religious pluralism and governmental nonestablishment.
The country's history contains evidence relevant to both religious influence and resistance to established religion. Christianity profoundly influenced American society, while the federal Constitution prohibited religious tests for federal office and the First Amendment prohibited Congress from establishing religion or interfering with its free exercise.
Historical scholarship therefore plays an important role in evaluating claims that Supreme Court doctrine either restores an original American religious tradition or weakens constitutional church-state separation.
The Federalist Society and Conservative Legal Networks
The source collection also examines the institutional development of modern conservative constitutional law.
The Federalist Society became a major professional network for conservative and libertarian lawyers, judges, academics, and law students. Republican presidential administrations increasingly drew judicial candidates from legal networks associated with originalism and textualism.
Christian-right legal organizations developed simultaneously and frequently shared interests with broader conservative legal movements, particularly in litigation concerning religious liberty, abortion, education, and sexuality.
However, the Federalist Society and Christian-right organizations are separate institutions, and participation in conservative legal networks does not itself demonstrate support for Christian nationalism.
The significance of these networks lies primarily in their role in developing legal theories, identifying lawyers and judges, organizing professional communities, and creating long-term strategies for constitutional change.
Competing Interpretations of the Court's Direction
The collected literature presents several competing interpretations of recent Supreme Court doctrine.
One interpretation views recent decisions as a restoration of genuine religious neutrality. From this perspective, older church-state doctrine sometimes treated religious individuals and organizations less favorably than secular counterparts. Decisions involving school funding, religious expression, and public benefits therefore correct discrimination against religion.
A second interpretation sees the same developments as an accommodationist shift. Under this view, the Court has not established Christianity but has adopted a more permissive understanding of government interaction with religion.
A third interpretation connects the Court's doctrinal transformation to the institutional success of the Christian right. Scholars emphasizing this perspective point to decades of litigation, judicial-selection activism, legal organizations, and political mobilization.
A fourth interpretation specifically examines white Christian nationalism and argues that some constitutional developments correspond with political projects linking Christianity, traditional social hierarchies, and American national identity.
These interpretations overlap but are not interchangeable. A ruling can simultaneously reflect established legal doctrines, conservative constitutional theory, organized religious-liberty advocacy, and political changes without proving that all participating institutions or judges share the same ideological motivations.
Religious Pluralism
Religious pluralism is central to evaluating the long-term consequences of these developments.
American religious-liberty doctrine applies not only to conservative Christians but also to Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, Native American religious practitioners, members of smaller faith communities, and people with unconventional religious beliefs.
Several landmark Free Exercise decisions involved minority faiths rather than politically dominant Christian groups. Sherbert v. Verner involved a Seventh-day Adventist. Wisconsin v. Yoder involved Amish families. Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah protected practitioners of Santería.
This broader history complicates claims that stronger Free Exercise protections inherently constitute Christian nationalism.
At the same time, critics argue that the practical effects of legal doctrine depend partly on which groups possess the resources, political influence, and legal organizations necessary to bring major cases.
The continuing constitutional challenge is therefore to protect religious exercise while maintaining government neutrality among religions and between religion and nonreligion.
The Continuing Church-State Debate
The Supreme Court's recent Religion Clause cases have substantially altered the framework governing religion and government.
Older debates often asked how much separation was necessary to prevent governmental establishment of religion. Contemporary litigation increasingly asks whether efforts to maintain separation themselves discriminate against religious individuals or organizations.
Cases involving prayer, school funding, religious displays, employment, foster care, public accommodations, and parental rights reveal the difficulty of drawing a single boundary applicable to every situation.
The Court's increasing reliance on history and tradition has further transformed this inquiry. Rather than applying a uniform doctrinal test such as Lemon, courts increasingly examine historical practices, coercion, neutrality, discrimination, speech, and the particular institutional setting involved.
This development gives historical interpretation an increasingly important role in determining the constitutional relationship between religion and government.
Conclusion
The relationship between Christian nationalism and the Supreme Court cannot be reduced to a claim that religious-liberty decisions are necessarily Christian nationalist decisions. The source material instead reveals an intersection among constitutional doctrine, conservative legal institutions, Christian-right activism, changing judicial philosophies, and broader disputes over American national identity.
The Roberts Court has strengthened religious-liberty protections in several important areas. Religious organizations have gained greater access to generally available public benefits; religious expression has received stronger protection; religious institutions have greater autonomy over certain employment decisions; workplace accommodations have expanded; and the Court has moved away from the Lemon test toward an Establishment Clause approach emphasizing history and tradition.
These developments have produced sharply different interpretations.
Supporters generally describe them as restoring neutrality, equality, free exercise, free speech, and protection against governmental hostility toward religion.
Critics argue that the cumulative effect may weaken church-state separation and provide legal advantages to religious organizations, particularly in areas where religious-liberty claims conflict with antidiscrimination rules, public education policies, reproductive rights, or other governmental objectives.
Scholarship connecting these developments to Christian nationalism focuses especially on the political and institutional networks that helped bring cases before the Court, influence judicial selection, develop constitutional arguments, and reshape public discussion of America's religious identity.
At the same time, the constitutional doctrines produced by these cases apply far beyond Christian nationalism. Their ultimate significance will depend on how courts apply them to Christians, religious minorities, nonreligious citizens, public institutions, and competing civil liberties.
The continuing debate therefore concerns not only Christianity's place in American national identity but a larger constitutional question: how a religiously diverse democracy can simultaneously prohibit governmental establishment of religion, protect the free exercise of religion, safeguard freedom of speech, and maintain equal citizenship for people with different religious and nonreligious beliefs.
- TOC**
Christian Nationalism, the Christian Right, the Roberts Court, and Judicial Politics
1. How Americans Feel About Religion's Influence in Government and Public Life | Chip Rotolo; Gregory A. Smith | Pew Research Center | May 14, 2026
Provides recent national survey data on Christian nationalism, government promotion of religion, church-state separation, and public views of religion in politics.
2. Trump's May 17 Rally Recalls 250 Years of Failed Attempts at a Christian Nation | Mark Silk | Religion News Service | May 13, 2026
Reviews historical campaigns seeking formal governmental recognition of Christianity, including reactions to the Supreme Court's 1892 Holy Trinity decision.
3. The Roberts Court's Judicial Zealotry | Amanda Hollis-Brusky | UCLA Law Review | April 15, 2026
Argues that elements of the Roberts Court's jurisprudence resemble ideas developed within conservative Christian legal institutions, particularly concerning religious liberty, history and tradition, and church-state separation.
4. ["But the Original Intent of the Constitution Would Be Restored": Catholic Legal Thought and the Emergence of First Amendment Originalism, 1947–87 | Dennis J. Wieboldt III | American Journal of Legal History | March 31, 2026]
Traces the historical development of Catholic legal thought and First Amendment originalism relevant to later conservative religious-liberty jurisprudence.
5. An Ecclesiastical Court: Christian Nationalism and Perceptions of the US Supreme Court | Miles T. Armaly; Jonathan M. King; Elizabeth A. Lane; Jessica A. Schoenherr | American Journal of Political Science | December 10, 2025
Uses survey research to investigate how Christian nationalist attitudes affect Americans' perceptions of the Supreme Court and reactions to controversial Court decisions.
6. [Transformations to the Religious Clauses Under the Roberts Court | Eric M. Stephen | Religion Compass | April 13, 2025]
Surveys major changes to Free Exercise and Establishment Clause doctrine under the Roberts Court and the growing constitutional protection afforded to religious claimants.
7. The Roberts Court's Religious Liberty Revolution: Redefining Church-State Boundaries | Brett A. Geier | The Changing Landscape of Religious Expression in US Public Schools | 2025
Examines changes in Religion Clause jurisprudence under Chief Justice Roberts, emphasizing stronger Free Exercise protections and diminished reliance on older Establishment Clause doctrines.
8. How the Supreme Court Is Dismantling the Separation of Church and State | Maggie Siddiqi et al. | Center for American Progress | 2025
Presents a critical analysis of recent Supreme Court Religion Clause decisions and argues that the Court has shifted constitutional doctrine toward greater accommodation of religious institutions.
9. [The Genesis of Christian Nationalism | Phoebe Petrovic | ProPublica; Wisconsin Watch | October 26, 2024]
Traces the historical development of the modern Christian right and Christian nationalism, including reactions to Supreme Court rulings on school prayer and abortion.
10. Christian-Nation Idea Fuels U.S. Conservative Causes, but Historians Say It Misreads Founders' Intent | Peter Smith | Associated Press | February 2024
Examines claims that the United States was founded as a specifically Christian nation and contrasts those claims with historical scholarship on the Constitution and religious establishment.
11. Who Belongs: White Christian Nationalism and the Roberts Court | Stephen M. Feldman | Cambridge University Press / JSTOR | 2024
Examines the Roberts Court through the framework of white Christian nationalism, focusing on religious freedom, pluralism, constitutional interpretation, and competing conceptions of American national identity.
12. [Making Fusionism Great Again: Authoritarian Means to Christian Nationalist Ends | Amanda Hollis-Brusky | The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science | 2024]
Examines relationships and tensions among the Federalist Society, mainstream conservative legal institutions, and Christian-worldview legal organizations.
13. Is Chief Justice John Roberts an Institutionalist? A Historical Institutionalist Analysis | Rogers M. Smith | The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science | 2024
Evaluates Roberts' jurisprudence and discusses the Court's transformation of religious-freedom doctrine alongside other major constitutional developments.
14. [Identity and Procedural Subordination in LGBTQ Religious Exemption Cases | Kyle C. Velte | William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice | 2024]
Examines Masterpiece Cakeshop, Fulton, and 303 Creative while discussing how religious-exemption litigation intersects with LGBTQ rights and white Christian nationalism.
15. [The Next Targets for the Group That Overturned Roe | David D. Kirkpatrick | The New Yorker | October 9, 2023]
Investigates Alliance Defending Freedom's development of litigation involving abortion, LGBTQ rights, religious exemptions, parental rights, and Supreme Court doctrine.
16. [The Vanguard Party of the Christian Right | Chris Lehmann | The Nation | October 5, 2023]
Examines Alliance Defending Freedom as an influential Christian-right litigation organization involved in major Supreme Court disputes.
17. [How the Christian Right Slayed a Monster and Reframed the Religion Clauses in Bremerton | Joshua C. Wilson; Amanda Hollis-Brusky | Polity | February 28, 2023]
Analyzes Kennedy v. Bremerton School District as part of a longer Christian-right legal strategy to replace the Lemon framework for Establishment Clause cases.
18. [White Christian Nationalism Enters the Political Mainstream: Implications for the Roberts Court and Religious Freedom | Stephen M. Feldman | Seton Hall Law Review | 2023]
Examines white Christian nationalism, its movement into mainstream politics, and what the author sees as implications for religious-freedom doctrine under the Roberts Court.
19. Introduction: The Jurisprudence of Justice Samuel Alito | Robert P. George | Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy | 2023
Introduces scholarship assessing Justice Alito's influence on constitutional law, including religious neutrality, Free Exercise jurisprudence, institutional autonomy, and religious displays.
20. A Handmaid's Tale: Amy Coney Barrett, Originalism, and the Specter of Religion | Multiple Authors | Communication and Democracy | 2023
Analyzes rhetoric surrounding Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation, Catholicism, originalism, judicial objectivity, and narratives concerning religious identity.
21. Growing Share of Americans See the Supreme Court as Friendly Toward Religion | Patricia Tevington | Pew Research Center | November 30, 2022
Reports survey findings showing changing public perceptions of the Supreme Court following several prominent decisions involving religion.
22. 45% of Americans Say U.S. Should Be a Christian Nation | Pew Research Center | Pew Research Center | October 27, 2022
Examines attitudes toward Christian nationalism, church-state relations, and perceptions that recent Supreme Court rulings benefited Christian interests.
23. [How the Christian Right Took Over the Judiciary and Changed America | Katherine Stewart | The Guardian | June 25, 2022]
Argues that conservative Christian activists pursued a long-term strategy focused on judicial appointments, litigation, and eventually overturning Roe v. Wade.
24. [Amicus Curiae Briefs and the Competing Legal Agendas of White Protestants in the United States, 1969–2020 | Jonathan B. Hensley; Paul T. McCartney | Politics and Religion | June 21, 2022]
Uses Supreme Court amicus briefs to trace differing legal agendas among white Protestant organizations over five decades.
25. [The Supreme Court's Facilitation of White Christian Nationalism | Caroline Mala Corbin | Alabama Law Review | 2020]
Argues that changes in Establishment Clause doctrine have made it easier for government actors to promote forms of Christianity associated with Christian nationalist understandings of American identity.
26. Symposium: The New Court and Religion | Erwin Chemerinsky | SCOTUSblog | July 26, 2019
Examines how the appointments of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh might alter the Supreme Court's approaches to the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause.
27. Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh: His Jurisprudence and Potential Impact on the Supreme Court | Congressional Research Service | CRS Report | September 2018
Surveys Kavanaugh's judicial record, including his prior opinions concerning religious liberty, government religious expression, and the Establishment Clause.
28. Can the Wall Between Church and State Survive Brett Kavanaugh? | Heather L. Weaver | American Civil Liberties Union | September 7, 2018
Presents the ACLU's analysis of Kavanaugh's record and expresses concern that his appointment could lead to weaker Establishment Clause protections.
29. How Would Brett Kavanaugh Rule in Supreme Court Religion Cases? | Jerome Socolovsky | PBS Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly | August 20, 2018
Reviews Kavanaugh's pre-Supreme Court record and considers his likely approach to disputes involving religious organizations, schools, public funding, and church-state separation.
30. [Inside the Christian Legal Powerhouse That Keeps Winning at the Supreme Court | Jessica Contrera | The Washington Post | July 4, 2018]
Profiles Alliance Defending Freedom, its Supreme Court litigation strategy, and its growing role in cases involving religious liberty, sexuality, and public policy.
31. Judge Neil M. Gorsuch: His Jurisprudence and Potential Impact on the Supreme Court | Congressional Research Service | CRS Report | March 2017
Reviews Gorsuch's record before his confirmation, including opinions indicating his approach toward religious expression, Establishment Clause doctrine, and Free Exercise protections.
32. The Free Exercise Clause and the Parameters of Religious Liberty | Pew Research Center | Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life | October 24, 2007
Reviews Supreme Court Free Exercise jurisprudence and considers how the appointments of Roberts and Alito might affect constitutional protections for religious practices.
33. A Delicate Balance: The Free Exercise Clause and the Supreme Court | Pew Research Center | Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life | October 24, 2007
Traces the Court's changing approach to religious exemptions and explains major historical shifts in Free Exercise doctrine.
Establishment Clause, Church-State Separation, Religious Expression, and Religious Displays
34. Establishment Clause Tests Generally | Congressional Research Service | Constitution Annotated / Congress.gov | Current
Explains the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause tests, including Lemon, endorsement, coercion, and the more recent emphasis on historical practices and understandings.
35. [The Supreme Court's 2021-22 Term in Review | Louis Lopez | American Bar Association | June 26, 2023]
Reviews major Supreme Court decisions from the term, including Kennedy v. Bremerton and the Court's use of history and tradition in Establishment Clause analysis.
36. Religious Coercion and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District | Jason T. Hanselman | University of Chicago Law Review Online | March 24, 2023
Critically examines the Court's treatment of coercion and considers how Kennedy changed Establishment Clause doctrine in public schools.
37. [These School Prayer Bills Are Out of Bounds | Mary Cugini | Americans United for Separation of Church and State | March 13, 2023]
Discusses state legislative efforts involving school prayer in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Kennedy.
38. [Kennedy v. Bremerton: The Wall Separating Church and State Just Got a Little Shorter | Brett A. Geier | Canopy Forum | August 15, 2022]
Analyzes the school-prayer ruling and its implications for public education and Establishment Clause doctrine.
39. [The New Supreme Court Doctrine Against Religious Discrimination | Andrew R. Lewis | The Washington Post | July 7, 2022]
Analyzes Carson v. Makin and Kennedy v. Bremerton as evidence of a developing doctrine emphasizing protection against government discrimination based on religion.
40. [Supreme Court Likes Separation of Powers, but Not of Church and State | David G. Savage | Los Angeles Times | July 7, 2022]
Reviews recent rulings involving prayer and public funding of religious education and describes the Court's changing approach to church-state separation.
41. [The US Supreme Court Is Letting Prayer Back in Public Schools. This Is Unsettling | Moira Donegan | The Guardian | June 28, 2022]
Offers a critical interpretation of Kennedy and argues that it represents a significant change in church-state jurisprudence.
42. [Supreme Court Rules for Public School Coach Who Kneeled and Prayed on Field | Jessica Gresko | Associated Press / PBS NewsHour | June 27, 2022]
Reports on the Kennedy decision, the majority's Free Speech and Free Exercise reasoning, and the dissent's concerns about student coercion.
43. [Kennedy v. Bremerton School District | Jake Haley | Willamette Law Online | June 27, 2022]
Summarizes the Supreme Court's reasoning that the coach's prayer was protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses.
44. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District | National Constitution Center | Constitution Center | June 27, 2022
Reviews the football-coach prayer case and explains how the Court replaced reliance on Lemon with an approach grounded in history and tradition.
45. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | June 27, 2022
Provides the complete majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions concerning public-employee prayer and religious expression.
46. [Supreme Court to Hear Case of Football Coach's On-Field Prayer | Jessica Gresko | Associated Press / Christian Science Monitor | April 25, 2022]
Provides background on Kennedy before oral argument and explains the competing religious-expression and church-state arguments.
47. [The Supreme Court Benches the Separation of Church and State | ACLU | American Civil Liberties Union | 2022]
Presents the ACLU's interpretation of Kennedy v. Bremerton and argues that the ruling weakened previous Establishment Clause protections.
48. [The Unfolding Revolution in the Jurisprudence of the Religion Clauses | Erwin Chemerinsky; Howard Gillman | SCOTUSblog | August 6, 2020]
Examines the Supreme Court's movement toward stronger Free Exercise protections and weaker restrictions on government interaction with religion.
49. [When Anti-Establishment Becomes Exclusion: The Supreme Court's Opinion in American Legion v. American Humanist Association and the Flip Side of the Endorsement Test | Patrick M. Garry | Nebraska Law Review | 2020]
Argues that removing longstanding religious symbols can raise its own questions about government neutrality toward religion.
50. Untangling Entanglement | Stephanie H. Barclay | Washington University Law Review | 2020
Examines whether portions of the Lemon test's entanglement doctrine remain historically defensible after the Court's movement toward history-based Establishment Clause analysis.
51. Establishment Clause Jurisprudence Still Groping for Clarity: Articulating a New Constitutional Model | Patrick M. Garry | Northeastern University Law Review | 2020
Reviews the declining influence of Lemon and proposes an alternative interpretation of the Establishment Clause based on the historical meaning of religious establishment.
52. Crossing Doctrines: Conflating Standing and the Merits Under the Establishment Clause | Ashutosh Bhagwat | Washington University Law Review | 2020
Uses American Legion to examine standing doctrine and the ability of individuals to challenge government-sponsored religious symbols.
53. American Legion v. American Humanist Association | Harvard Law Review | Harvard Law Review | November 2019
Analyzes the Supreme Court's decision upholding the Bladensburg Cross and its implications for Lemon and religious-display jurisprudence.
54. [American Legion v. The American Humanist Association and the Bladensburg Cross: Implications for Education | Charles J. Russo | Religion & Education | October 9, 2019]
Examines the Court's decision permitting a longstanding cross-shaped war memorial on public land and considers implications for schools and religious symbols.
55. American Legion v. American Humanist Association | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 20, 2019
Provides the decision, opinions, and case background for the Court's ruling that the longstanding Bladensburg Peace Cross did not violate the Establishment Clause.
56. [Afternoon Round-Up: The American Legion v. American Humanist Association | Jon Levitan | SCOTUSblog | June 20, 2019]
Summarizes legal commentary following the Supreme Court's decision upholding the Bladensburg Peace Cross.
57. Morris County Board of Chosen Freeholders v. Freedom From Religion Foundation | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | March 4, 2019
Contains Justice Kavanaugh's statement, joined by Justices Alito and Gorsuch, regarding public historic-preservation grants for religious buildings.
58. Original Meaning and the Establishment Clause: A Corpus Linguistics Analysis | Stephanie H. Barclay; Brady Earley; Annika Boone | Arizona Law Review | 2019
Uses founding-era linguistic evidence to examine competing theories about the original meaning of the Establishment Clause.
59. Town of Greece v. Galloway | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | May 5, 2014
Provides the Court's decision allowing predominantly Christian prayers before town meetings under the historical tradition of legislative prayer.
60. Town of Greece v. Galloway: Supreme Court Bulletin | Legal Information Institute | Cornell Law School | 2013–2014
Presents background and competing constitutional arguments concerning legislative prayer and government alignment with Christianity.
61. [Town of Greece v. Galloway: What Is the Supreme Court Up To? | Jessie Hill | SCOTUSblog | September 30, 2013]
Examines the constitutional issues surrounding legislative prayer before the Court decided Town of Greece v. Galloway.
62. Pleasant Grove City v. Summum | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | February 25, 2009
Addresses government control over permanent monuments in public parks and arose from a dispute concerning placement of a monument alongside the Ten Commandments.
63. [The Hidden Legacy of Holy Trinity Church: The Unique National Institution Canon | Anita S. Krishnakumar | William & Mary Law Review | 2009]
Reexamines the Supreme Court's 1892 Holy Trinity decision and its famous description of the United States as a "Christian nation."
64. Van Orden v. Perry | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 27, 2005
Summarizes the Supreme Court ruling permitting a Ten Commandments monument on the Texas Capitol grounds because of its historical context.
65. McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 27, 2005
Covers the companion Ten Commandments case in which the Court ruled that displays in Kentucky courthouses violated the Establishment Clause.
66. Mitchell v. Helms | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 28, 2000
Examines government educational assistance reaching religious schools and the Court's increasingly neutral-treatment approach toward public benefits.
67. Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 19, 2000
Covers the Court's ruling that school-sponsored student prayer before public high-school football games violated the Establishment Clause.
68. Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 29, 1995
Examines whether the Ku Klux Klan could display a cross in a public forum near the Ohio Statehouse and distinguishes private religious speech from government endorsement.
69. Lee v. Weisman | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 24, 1992
Explains the Court's conclusion that clergy-led prayer at a public-school graduation exerted unconstitutional religious coercion.
70. Marsh v. Chambers | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | July 5, 1983
Documents the foundational modern case upholding legislative prayer based largely on historical practice dating to the First Congress.
71. Abington School District v. Schempp | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 17, 1963
Covers the Supreme Court ruling striking down government-sponsored Bible reading and devotional exercises in public schools.
72. [Prayer, Public Schools and the Supreme Court | Paul G. Kauper | Michigan Law Review | 1963]
Examines the constitutional debate surrounding the Supreme Court's early school-prayer decisions and their implications for the Establishment Clause.
73. Engel v. Vitale | National Constitution Center | Constitution Center | 1962
Explains the landmark ruling prohibiting state-composed prayer in public schools and includes excerpts from the majority and dissenting opinions.
74. [Constitutional Law—Separation of Church and State—Bible Reading in the Public Schools | Henry B. Pearsall | Michigan Law Review | 1960]
Discusses constitutional disputes over Bible reading in public schools before the Supreme Court's major 1960s Establishment Clause decisions.
Religious Schools, Public Funding, and Education
75. Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | May 22, 2025
Records the Supreme Court's equally divided decision affirming the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling after Justice Barrett did not participate.
76. [Supreme Court Divided over Approving First Religious Charter School | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | April 30, 2025]
Reports on oral argument in the St. Isidore case and the potential consequences for religious education and public-school systems.
77. [Supreme Court to Consider Bid for First Religious Charter School | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | April 28, 2025]
Explains competing Free Exercise and Establishment Clause arguments over whether Oklahoma could operate a publicly funded Catholic charter school.
78. [Supreme Court Will Weigh In on Effort to Found Nation's First Religious Charter School | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | January 24, 2025]
Reports on the Court's decision to hear the Oklahoma religious-charter-school dispute involving St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School.
79. [Supreme Court to Weigh Major Clash Between Church and State | POLITICO | January 24, 2025]
Reports on the Oklahoma religious-charter-school case and the constitutional dispute over public funding, state action, and religious education.
80. Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond | Legal Information Institute | Cornell Law School | 2025
Explains the constitutional issues surrounding Oklahoma's attempt to authorize the nation's first publicly funded religious charter school.
81. [The U.S. Supreme Court Paves Pathway for Students to Attend Publicly Funded Religious Schools: The Potential for Discriminatory Practices | Suzanne E. Eckes; Preston Green | Religion & Education | October 12, 2022]
Examines Carson and considers how publicly funded religious-school programs may interact with civil-rights protections.
82. [Supreme Court Decision Paves Way for Public Funds to Flow to Religious Schools | Edward Graham | National Education Association | July 21, 2022]
Presents the NEA's analysis of Carson and its potential effects on public-school funding and church-state separation.
83. [Supreme Court Buttresses Public Funding for Religious Schooling | National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education | Teachers College, Columbia University | June 21, 2022]
Reviews Carson and places the decision within the Court's evolving jurisprudence on government aid to religious education.
84. [SCOTUS: Public Funds Can't Be Excluded from Religious Instruction | Naaz Modan | K-12 Dive | June 21, 2022]
Reports on Carson and explains the Court's distinction between government establishment of religion and equal access to public benefits.
85. [High Court Opens the Door to More Public Funding of Religious Schools | Moriah Balingit | The Washington Post | June 21, 2022]
Reports on Carson v. Makin and its potential implications for government funding of religious education.
86. [Court Strikes Down Maine's Ban on Using Public Funds at Religious Schools | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | June 21, 2022]
Explains Carson v. Makin, in which the Court ruled that Maine could not exclude religious schools from a generally available tuition-assistance program.
87. [Court Rules That Religious Schools Cannot Be Excluded from State Funding for Private Schools | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | June 30, 2020]
Summarizes Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue and the Court's conclusion that excluding religious schools violated the Free Exercise Clause.
88. [Justices Divided in Montana School-Choice Case | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | January 22, 2020]
Reports on oral arguments in Espinoza and the debate over religious discrimination and government support for religious schooling.
89. [Justices to Consider Dispute over Tax Credits for Scholarships | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | January 15, 2020]
Provides background on Espinoza and its relationship to earlier Supreme Court decisions concerning public benefits and religious institutions.
90. [Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue: The Battle Between May Fund and Must Fund | Frank Ravitch | SCOTUSblog | September 18, 2019]
Examines whether states merely may fund religious education or can constitutionally be required to include religious schools in neutral funding programs.
91. [Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer: Paradigm Lost? | Ira C. Lupu; Robert W. Tuttle | George Washington University Law School | 2017]
Analyzes Trinity Lutheran and the emerging constitutional rule against excluding religious institutions from generally available public-benefit programs.
Free Exercise, Public Benefits, Religious Institutions, and Pandemic Restrictions
92. Laws That Discriminate Against Religious Practice | Congressional Research Service | Constitution Annotated / Congress.gov | Current
Explains Supreme Court doctrine requiring heightened scrutiny when government discriminates against religious institutions or practices.
93. Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | June 5, 2025
Provides the unanimous ruling that Wisconsin violated the First Amendment by making theological distinctions when deciding which religious charities qualified for an unemployment-tax exemption.
94. Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission: Supreme Court Bulletin | Legal Information Institute | Cornell Law School | 2025
Provides background on the dispute and explains competing arguments concerning church autonomy, religious discrimination, and tax exemptions.
95. Carson v. Makin | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | June 21, 2022
Provides the decision requiring Maine to include religious schools in a generally available tuition-assistance program.
96. Carson v. Makin | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 21, 2022
Summarizes the majority and dissenting arguments over public funding of religious instruction and the relationship between the two Religion Clauses.
97. Fulton v. City of Philadelphia | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 17, 2021
Covers the Court's ruling for Catholic Social Services in its dispute with Philadelphia over certification of same-sex foster parents.
98. Fulton v. City of Philadelphia | National Constitution Center | Constitution Center | June 17, 2021
Explains the foster-care dispute and the Court's application of Free Exercise principles to Philadelphia's contracting system.
99. Tandon v. Newsom | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | April 9, 2021
Addresses California pandemic restrictions on religious gatherings and emphasizes that regulations are not neutral when comparable secular activities receive more favorable treatment.
100. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | November 25, 2020
Marks a significant pandemic-era religious-liberty ruling blocking New York attendance restrictions on houses of worship.
101. Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | July 24, 2020
Concerns Nevada pandemic restrictions treating casinos and certain secular venues differently from houses of worship and includes significant dissenting opinions.
102. Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue | National Constitution Center | Constitution Center | June 30, 2020
Explains the ruling that Montana could not exclude religious schools from a scholarship program available to other private schools.
103. Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | June 30, 2020
Provides the full Supreme Court decision and competing opinions concerning public benefits, religious schools, and state constitutional restrictions.
104. South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | May 29, 2020
Documents an earlier stage of the Court's pandemic religious-liberty jurisprudence before Justice Barrett's appointment changed the Court's balance.
105. Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | June 26, 2017
Provides the Court's ruling that Missouri could not exclude an otherwise eligible church from a playground-resurfacing grant solely because of its religious identity.
106. Christian Legal Society v. Martinez | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 28, 2010
Addresses whether a public law school could require officially recognized student organizations, including Christian groups, to accept all students as members.
107. Locke v. Davey | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | February 25, 2004
Examines the Court's earlier ruling allowing Washington State to exclude devotional theology degrees from a scholarship program, illustrating limits to compelled religious funding.
108. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 27, 2002
Covers the Supreme Court decision upholding a school-voucher program in which parents could direct public benefits to religious schools.
109. Good News Club v. Milford Central School | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 11, 2001
Holds that a public school permitting secular community groups to meet after hours generally could not exclude an evangelical children's organization because its activities were religious.
110. Good News Club v. Milford Central School | National Constitution Center | Constitution Center | 2001
Examines equal access for evangelical organizations using public-school property outside instructional hours.
111. Agostini v. Felton | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 23, 1997
Marks an important shift permitting publicly funded remedial teachers to provide services in religious schools under neutral government programs.
112. Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 29, 1995
Holds that a public university engaged in viewpoint discrimination when it excluded a Christian student publication from a generally available funding program.
113. Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 18, 1993
Examines whether a publicly funded sign-language interpreter could assist a student attending a Catholic school without violating the Establishment Clause.
114. Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 11, 1993
Establishes strict scrutiny for laws deliberately targeting religious practices, a principle central to modern Free Exercise jurisprudence.
115. Employment Division v. Smith | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | April 17, 1990
Holds that neutral laws of general applicability ordinarily do not require religious exemptions, generating later legislative and judicial disputes over religious accommodation.
116. Widmar v. Vincent | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | December 8, 1981
Establishes important principles requiring equal access for religious student organizations when public universities open facilities to other student groups.
117. Wisconsin v. Yoder | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | May 15, 1972
Protects Amish families from compulsory-school-attendance requirements beyond eighth grade, becoming a landmark Free Exercise decision.
118. Sherbert v. Verner | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 17, 1963
Establishes the earlier compelling-interest approach for government burdens on religious practice after a Seventh-day Adventist was denied unemployment benefits.
Religious Exemptions, LGBTQ Rights, and Conscience Claims
119. [303 Creative and the Question of Governmental Authority to Dictate Commercial Transactions | Rena M. Lindevaldsen | Liberty University Law Review | 2024]
Examines 303 Creative from a perspective emphasizing expressive freedom and limits on government authority over private businesses.
120. [The Supreme Court's 303 Creative Decision and the Threat to LGBTQ+ Health Care | Elizabeth W. Sepper; Joshua B. Romero; Daniel G. Aaron | JAMA | October 19, 2023]
Considers whether the reasoning in 303 Creative could affect discrimination disputes involving LGBTQ patients and health-care providers.
121. [303 Creative v. Elenis—It's Not About Religious Liberty | Stephen Smith | Northeastern University Law Review | September 7, 2023]
Argues that 303 Creative is best understood primarily as a compelled-speech case rather than a Free Exercise case.
122. [Supreme Court Rules Website Designer Can Decline to Create Same-Sex Wedding Websites | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | June 30, 2023]
Explains 303 Creative v. Elenis and the Court's holding that Colorado could not compel a designer to create expressive content she opposed.
123. [Supreme Court Protects Web Designer Who Won't Do Gay Wedding Websites | Robert Barnes; Ann E. Marimow | The Washington Post | June 30, 2023]
Reports on 303 Creative and the competing free-speech, religious-liberty, and nondiscrimination arguments surrounding the case.
124. [Supreme Court Issues Ruling Protecting Religious Free Speech | Joe Carter | The Gospel Coalition | June 30, 2023]
Presents an evangelical Christian interpretation of 303 Creative emphasizing protections for speech connected to religious convictions.
125. [Supreme Court Decides 303 Creative, LLC v. Elenis | Stephanie L. Gutwein; Mark D. Taticchi | Faegre Drinker | June 30, 2023]
Provides a legal analysis of the decision and its distinction between compelled expression and generally applicable public-accommodation regulation.
126. [Designer Does Not Have to Make Websites for Same-Sex Couples, Supreme Court Rules | Lindsey Toomer; Quentin Young | Oregon Capital Chronicle | June 30, 2023]
Reports on the majority and dissenting opinions in 303 Creative and reactions from civil-rights and religious-liberty advocates.
127. [303 Creative LLC v. Elenis | Annie Cantera-Snow | Willamette Law Online | June 30, 2023]
Summarizes the Court's First Amendment analysis and the factual and procedural history of 303 Creative.
128. [303 Creative Is a Big Win for Religious Liberty at the Supreme Court | David Closson | Family Research Council | June 30, 2023]
Presents the Family Research Council's supportive interpretation of the 303 Creative ruling and its implications for religiously motivated business owners.
129. [Justices to Hear Evangelical Christian Postal Worker's Religious Accommodation Case | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | April 17, 2023]
Provides background on Groff v. DeJoy and the dispute over how much employers must accommodate workers' religious practices.
130. [Court Requires Religious Exemption but Leaves Many Questions Unanswered | Holly Hollman | SCOTUSblog | June 22, 2021]
Analyzes the narrow basis of Fulton and explains why the decision did not resolve broader questions surrounding Employment Division v. Smith.
131. [Protecting Free Exercise Under Smith and After Smith | Thomas C. Berg; Douglas Laycock | SCOTUSblog | June 19, 2021]
Presents a religious-liberty perspective on Fulton and considers how Free Exercise doctrine might develop after the decision.
132. [Fulton Quiets Tandon's Thunder: A Free Exercise Puzzle | Jim Oleske | SCOTUSblog | June 18, 2021]
Examines tensions between Fulton and the Court's pandemic-era Free Exercise decisions and considers the future of religious exemptions.
133. [From the Court, a Vindication of Faith-Based Service. From Alito, a Blueprint for the Future | Andrea Picciotti-Bayer | SCOTUSblog | June 18, 2021]
Presents a supportive interpretation of Fulton and examines Justice Alito's argument for reconsidering Employment Division v. Smith.
134. [Giving People a License to Discriminate Because of Their Religious Beliefs | Erwin Chemerinsky | Los Angeles Times | June 17, 2021]
Criticizes the direction of religious-exemption doctrine and discusses the potential consequences of Fulton for antidiscrimination laws.
135. [Court Holds That City's Refusal to Make Referrals to Faith-Based Agency Violates Constitution | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | June 17, 2021]
Explains Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, in which the Court ruled for Catholic Social Services in a dispute over same-sex foster-parent certifications.
136. [Justices Sympathetic to Faith-Based Foster-Care Agency in Anti-Discrimination Dispute | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | November 5, 2020]
Reports on oral arguments in Fulton and the justices' debate over religious freedom, same-sex couples, and government contracting.
137. [Court Will Tackle Dispute Involving Religious Foster-Care Agency, LGBTQ Rights | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | October 28, 2020]
Provides background on Fulton and explains its potential implications for Employment Division v. Smith and religious exemptions.
138. [Court Rejects Challenge to Exemptions from Birth-Control Mandate | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | July 8, 2020]
Explains Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania and the Court's approval of expanded religious and moral exemptions from the contraceptive mandate.
139. [A Piece of Cake or Religious Expression: Masterpiece Cakeshop and the First Amendment | Richard F. Duncan | Nebraska Law Review | January 7, 2019]
Examines the competing free-speech, Free Exercise, and public-accommodation arguments presented in Masterpiece Cakeshop.
140. [Masterpiece of Misdirection? | Mark Strasser | Washington and Lee Law Review | 2019]
Critically examines the Court's reasoning in Masterpiece Cakeshop and the decision's treatment of religious neutrality.
141. [Masterpiece Cakeshop: Summary and Analysis of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission | Michael Beato | Florida Law Review | 2019]
Analyzes the Supreme Court's treatment of religious hostility and its decision to avoid resolving the broader compelled-service question.
142. [Masterpiece Cakeshop: A Formula for Legislative Accommodations of Religion | Matthew A. Brown | Akron Law Review | 2019]
Considers whether legislative religious accommodations could provide an alternative to constitutional litigation following Masterpiece Cakeshop.
143. [Masterpiece Cakeshop and the Future of Religious Freedom | Mark L. Movsesian | Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy | 2019]
Examines the Court's narrow Masterpiece Cakeshop decision and its significance for future conflicts between religious conscience and antidiscrimination law.
144. [Inverting Animus: Masterpiece Cakeshop and the New Minorities | Melissa Murray | The Supreme Court Review | 2019]
Analyzes the Court's use of religious hostility and animus concepts and their implications for conflicts involving equality and religious liberty.
145. [Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission: Watch Your Mouth! | R. Spooner | Northeastern University Law Review | August 2, 2018]
Examines the Court's reliance on statements by government officials that the majority regarded as evidence of hostility toward religion.
146. [Analysis: Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission | Timothy R. Holbrook | Emory Law | June 20, 2018]
Reviews the Court's narrow ruling and explains why it left major questions about religious objections and LGBTQ protections unresolved.
147. [Masterpiece Cakeshop—Not as Narrow as May First Appear | Thomas C. Berg; Douglas Laycock | SCOTUSblog | June 5, 2018]
Argues that the ruling's prohibition on governmental hostility to religion may have broader importance than the decision's narrow disposition initially suggested.
148. [Supreme Court Sides with Christian Baker in Same-Sex Wedding Cake Case | Axios | June 4, 2018]
Summarizes the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling and the Court's conclusion that Colorado officials had not treated the baker's religious beliefs neutrally.
149. [Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Would Not Make Wedding Cake for Gay Couple | Robert Barnes | The Washington Post | June 4, 2018]
Reports on Masterpiece Cakeshop and reactions from religious-liberty and LGBTQ-rights advocates.
150. [Supreme Court Rules for Christian Cake Baker but Voices Support for Gay Rights Too | David G. Savage | Los Angeles Times | June 4, 2018]
Reports on the Court's ruling for the baker while explaining the decision's narrow reliance on religious neutrality.
151. [A Starch Reality: What Is at Stake in Masterpiece Cakeshop? | Anton Sorkin | Oxford Journal of Law and Religion | January 24, 2018]
Discusses the religious-liberty and equality questions presented by the dispute before the Court issued its ruling.
152. [Masterpiece Cakeshop: "Does Anybody Really Know What Time It Is?" | Ted H.S. Hong | UIC John Marshall Law Review | 2018]
Examines the constitutional arguments raised by Masterpiece Cakeshop and competing conceptions of religious and civil rights.
153. [Is a Cake Worth a Thousand Words? Masterpiece Cakeshop and the Impact of Antidiscrimination Laws on the Marketplace of Ideas | Scott W. Gaylord | Tennessee Law Review | 2018]
Analyzes whether custom commercial products can constitute protected expression under the First Amendment.
154. [Disentangling Free Speech and Freedom of Religion in Masterpiece Cakeshop | Eric Segall | SCOTUSblog | September 13, 2017]
Examines the distinct Free Speech and Free Exercise claims raised by the baker before the Supreme Court heard the case.
155. [Wedding Cakes v. Religious Beliefs?: In Plain English | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | September 11, 2017]
Provides accessible background on Masterpiece Cakeshop before argument and outlines the conflict between religious objections and Colorado's antidiscrimination law.
156. [Hobby Lobby Symposium: Your God Is Bigger Than My God | Ayesha N. Khan | SCOTUSblog | June 30, 2014]
Critiques the Court's Hobby Lobby ruling and considers the consequences of allowing closely held corporations to obtain religious exemptions from federal requirements.
157. [Supreme Court Upholds 'Ministerial Exception' | Ron Kampeas | Jewish Telegraphic Agency | January 11, 2012]
Explains the Hosanna-Tabor ruling and its significance for the autonomy of religious organizations in choosing ministers.
158. [Church Wins Firing Case at Supreme Court | Ted Olsen | Christianity Today | January 11, 2012]
Reports on Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, in which the Court unanimously recognized a constitutional ministerial exception to employment-discrimination law.
Religious Exercise in Schools and the Workplace
159. [Is Religious Freedom Possible in State Schools? | Richard Garnett | SCOTUSblog | July 25, 2025]
Discusses Mahmoud and the broader constitutional problem of accommodating religious families within religiously diverse public-school systems.
160. [When Inclusion Becomes Compulsion: Mahmoud v. Taylor, Pluralism, and Public Education | Asma Uddin | SCOTUSblog | July 1, 2025]
Examines the Court's ruling for parents seeking religious opt-outs and frames the case in terms of religious pluralism in public education.
161. Mahmoud v. Taylor | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 27, 2025
Covers the Court's ruling involving parents seeking religious exemptions from elementary-school instruction using books with LGBTQ themes.
162. [Supreme Court Considers Parents' Efforts to Exempt Children from Books with LGBTQ Themes | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | April 21, 2025]
Previews Mahmoud and explains the competing Free Exercise, parental-rights, and public-school administration arguments.
163. [Justices Take Up Maryland Parents' Challenge to LGBTQ Books in Schools | Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog | January 17, 2025]
Reports on the Court's decision to hear Mahmoud v. Taylor, involving parents seeking religious opt-outs from LGBTQ-inclusive elementary-school materials.
164. Sabbath Accommodations as a Civil Right: History, Title VII, and the Path to Groff v. DeJoy | Isaac May | FIU Law Review | 2025
Places Sabbath accommodation within the history of religious-minority civil rights and traces developments leading to Groff.
165. Title VII and Religious Accommodations in the Workplace After Groff v. DeJoy | Robert Roberts | Review of Public Personnel Administration | October 15, 2024
Studies dozens of lower-court decisions following Groff to evaluate the ruling's effects on workplace religious-accommodation litigation.
166. A Good-Faith Attempt at Defining Reasonable Accommodations After Groff v. DeJoy | Author listed by Boston College Law Review | Boston College Law Review | May 28, 2024
Considers how courts should define reasonable religious accommodations after Groff and proposes greater emphasis on employer good faith.
167. Statutory Religious Accommodation in Employment and the Problems of Judicial Intent and Outcome | George Wright | Texas A&M Law Review | 2024
Critically examines Groff and considers unintended consequences of stronger religious-accommodation protections in workplaces.
168. Accommodating Religion After Groff | Charles A. Sullivan | SMU Law Review | 2024
Evaluates the practical and doctrinal consequences of the Court's strengthened workplace religious-accommodation standard.
169. Groff v. DeJoy | Harvard Law Review | Harvard Law Review | November 2023
Analyzes the Supreme Court's replacement of the longstanding "more than de minimis" formulation with a requirement of substantial increased costs to establish undue hardship.
170. Groff v. DeJoy | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | June 29, 2023
Provides the unanimous decision strengthening Title VII protections for employees seeking religious accommodations at work.
171. Reinterpreting the Ministerial Exception in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru | Robert Drust | Nebraska Law Review | 2023
Examines the expanding ministerial exception and the challenges courts face determining which religious employees fall within it.
172. Gerald Groff | First Liberty Institute | First Liberty Institute | 2023
Presents the religious-liberty organization's perspective on the litigation and explains why Groff sought exemption from Sunday work.
173. Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru | Harvard Law Review | Harvard Law Review | November 2020
Analyzes the Court's expansion of the ministerial exception to teachers performing important religious functions even without formal ministerial titles.
174. Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru | Supreme Court of the United States | Legal Information Institute | July 8, 2020
Provides the full Supreme Court ruling concerning the authority of religious institutions to select employees who perform significant religious functions.
175. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | January 11, 2012
Establishes the constitutional ministerial exception protecting religious organizations' authority over certain employment decisions involving ministers.
Dobbs, Abortion, Religion, and Christian Nationalism
176. [Making Sense of the Supreme Court's Historic Year | Amanda Hollis-Brusky | The Washington Post | December 28, 2022]
Reviews the Court's major 2022 decisions, including Dobbs and religion cases, and discusses political-science research relevant to the Court's changing direction.
177. [Jewish Women Sue over Kentucky Abortion Laws, Citing Religious Freedom | Yonat Shimron | The Washington Post | October 10, 2022]
Reports on post-Dobbs lawsuits arguing that abortion restrictions based on one conception of when life begins can conflict with the religious beliefs of other faith communities.
178. [The Christian Right's Version of History Paid Off on Abortion and Guns | Lauren R. Kerby | The Washington Post | July 18, 2022]
Argues that Christian-right narratives about American history helped shape historical reasoning visible in Dobbs and other recent Supreme Court decisions.
179. [The Supreme Court's Abortion Decision Is Based on a Myth. Here's Why. | Samira K. Mehta | The Washington Post | June 24, 2022]
Argues that the historical narrative used in Dobbs overlaps with a white Christian nationalist conception of American history and traditional family structure.
180. [Evangelicals Opposed Abortion Long Before Their Leaders Caught Up | Neil O'Brian | The Washington Post | May 18, 2022]
Examines historical evidence about evangelical attitudes toward abortion before Roe and the later political mobilization of conservative evangelical leaders.
Corporations, Health Care, and RFRA Religious Exemptions
181. Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | July 8, 2020
Covers the Court's approval of federal regulations providing broad religious and moral exemptions from the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive mandate.
182. Zubik v. Burwell | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | May 16, 2016
Examines litigation by religious nonprofits objecting to the contraceptive-coverage accommodation and the Court's decision to return the cases to lower courts.
183. Be Careful What You Wish For: Why Hobby Lobby Weakens Religious Freedom | Frank S. Ravitch | BYU Law Review | 2016
Argues that extending religious accommodations to large for-profit businesses could ultimately undermine support for accommodations benefiting religious individuals and institutions.
184. Religious Rights in Historical, Theoretical, and International Context: Hobby Lobby as a Jurisprudential Anomaly? | S. I. Strong | Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law | 2015
Evaluates Hobby Lobby against broader theories of religious rights and comparative approaches to religious liberty.
185. Hobby Lobby: The Crafty Case That Threatens Women's Rights and Religious Freedom | Leslie C. Griffin | Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly | 2015
Presents a critical view of Hobby Lobby and argues that broad religious exemptions can conflict with employee civil rights.
186. Corporate Free Exercise of Religion and the Interpretation of Congressional Intent: Where Will It End? | Patrick J. McNulty; Adam D. Zenor | Southern Illinois University Law Journal | 2015
Analyzes the recognition of religious-exercise interests by closely held corporations under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
187. Constitution Check: Did the Supreme Court Give Corporations a Religious Soul? | Lyle Denniston | National Constitution Center | 2015
Clarifies that Hobby Lobby rested on RFRA rather than granting corporations a constitutional Free Exercise right.
188. Conscience and Complicity: Assessing Pleas for Religious Exemptions in Hobby Lobby's Wake | Amy J. Sepinwall | University of Chicago Law Review | 2015
Examines the concept of moral complicity underlying religious objections to contraception and considers implications for later exemption claims.
189. Bad Statutes Make Bad Law: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby | William P. Marshall | Supreme Court Review | 2015
Places Hobby Lobby within the history of Employment Division v. Smith and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
190. A Critique of Hobby Lobby and the Supreme Court's Hands-Off Approach to Religion | Samuel J. Levine | Notre Dame Law Review Online | 2015
Evaluates the Court's reluctance to scrutinize the theological reasoning behind religious claims and discusses Hobby Lobby's implications.
191. The Hobby Lobby Moment | Paul Horwitz | Harvard Law Review | November 2014
Places Hobby Lobby within broader disputes over religious accommodation and the changing political and social meaning of religious liberty.
192. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | June 30, 2014
Provides the Supreme Court decision granting closely held corporations RFRA protection from the federal contraceptive-coverage mandate.
193. Hobby Lobby in Constitutional Waters: Two Life Rings and an Anchor | Gregory P. Magarian | Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc | 2014
Examines how Hobby Lobby expanded religious-accommodation claims to for-profit corporations under RFRA.
General Religion Clause References
194. The Free Exercise Clause | Michael W. McConnell; Richard A. Posner | National Constitution Center / Interactive Constitution | Current
Presents contrasting scholarly interpretations of Free Exercise doctrine and reviews cases ranging from Smith to Hobby Lobby and modern accommodation disputes.
195. Religion Supreme Court Cases | Justia | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center | Current
Provides a chronological reference collection of major Supreme Court religion cases, including Mahmoud, Catholic Charities, Kennedy, Carson, Fulton, Espinoza, Trinity Lutheran, Hobby Lobby, and earlier Establishment Clause precedents.
