Grand Finale for the Religious Liberty Commission
After nearly a year of hard work, the Religious Liberty Commission will hold its final hearing on Monday, April 13 to discuss the past, present and future of religious freedom in America.
First Liberty President and CEO Kelly Shackelford serves as a Commissioner, representing the only nonprofit religious liberty legal organization on the Commission.
The hearing will be at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C. The session will be livestreamed at 8:30 a.m. EST and is expected to last until 2:00 p.m. You can watch it on the Department of Justice website.
The Commission has been gathering information and documenting the testimonies of people impacted by religious discrimination and attacks on their constitutional rights, including many First Liberty clients.
What happens next? The Commission will deliver its final report to the President in a planned Rose Garden Ceremony on the National Day of Prayer in May. The report will include policy recommendations and suggest legislative actions to safeguard religious freedom.
The Commission will officially dissolve on July 4, 2026, the 250th anniversary of American independence.
Wait, Pastor Chris Avell Could Still End Up in Jail?
For Pastor Chris Avell and Dad’s Place, the past week was filled with celebration. After being harassed for almost two years, a state court issued a final order dismissing the City of Bryan’s civil lawsuit against the church and its 24/7 ministry.
But the legal battle isn’t over. If you recall, the city filed more than 18 criminal charges against Pastor Chris. First Liberty was able to get those dismissed, but the City would not give up. They filed more charges against Pastor Avell, tried him, and a court convicted him, sentencing him to a $200 fine and a possible 60-days in jail.
We were able to get a court order that put a hold on the criminal sentence, keeping Pastor Chris out of jail for the time being. But there’s an appeal still pending in state court regarding those criminal charges.
We’re going to fight this case until Pastor Chris is fully free to serve his community—without the threat of being thrown in jail.
Pastor Chris still needs your support. Can he count on you? Please give to First Liberty today.
Leading The Conversation | First Liberty in the News
Why Classical Christian Education Will Save This Country – Center for Religion, Culture & Democracy Senior Fellow Gerald R. McDermott in Public Discourse
Kentucky Barista Takes Legal Action After Termination, Claims She Was Fired for Sharing Her Faith – Fox News
Ohio Church Wins Homeless Ministry Legal Battle With City – Epoch Times
Arkansas’ Ten Commandments Monument Law Ruled Unconstitutional – Bloomberg Law
In This County, You Will Not Build Your Church
“Chatham County is not a place to call home for that size of a church.”
That’s what the head of a zoning board said when The Summit Church in Chapel Hill, North Carolina applied for a building permit.
After significant growth at one of its campuses, the church sought a permanent location to call home. They found a parcel of land across the street from a shopping center and submitted a rezoning request to build their facility. The county unfairly denied the proposal, and the church filed suit in federal court.
A district court ruled in the church’s favor. But the county appealed, insisting on keeping the church out.
First Liberty recently filed a brief asking a federal appeals court to make it clear to the county that federal law demands churches be treated fairly. The outcome of this case could ensure that this congregation—and all houses of worship—are fully free to live out their divinely inspired mission.
Thou Shalt Read U.S. Supreme Court Rulings
There’s a beautiful Ten Commandments monument at the historic Tarrant County courthouse in Fort Worth, Texas. But an anti-religious group is trying to get it removed.
The Freedom from Religion Foundation routinely sends a sternly worded letter any time religious expression happens in the public square. They believe the First Amendment requires local and state governments to scrub away any reference to God on public property. This time around, they say placing the Decalogue at the courthouse is unconstitutional.
They’re wrong on the law and history. Our Supreme Court victories in the landmark Coach Kennedy and Bladensburg Peace Cross cases made clear that, when determining whether something—like a Ten Commandments monument—violates the Establishment Clause, courts must ask whether it accords with our Nation’s historical practices, and whether it reflects the understanding of the Founding Fathers. And the display of the Ten Commandments certainly does. A symbol of law and moral conduct with both religious and secular significance for all Americans, honoring the Decalogue is consistent with our nation’s history and tradition. You can find similar monuments at state Capitols in Texas, Arkansas and Kentucky and an image of Moses holding the Commandments is featured in the U.S. Supreme Court’s own courtroom.
We sent a letter on behalf of the Tarrant County commissioners letting the Freedom from Religion Foundation know the Ten Commandments monument is here to stay.
“Legally suspect diatribes from anti-religious groups should be ignored,” said Garrett Bell, Associate Counsel at First Liberty. “Displaying the Ten Commandments on public grounds is consistent with Supreme Court decisions that recognize our religious heritage.”
Wow, Huge Win So Counselors Can Speak Freely
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled to protect free speech for counselors across America. In Chiles v. Salazar, the Court ruled 8-1 on Monday that a Colorado law banning licensed counselors from discussing certain types of counseling with minors is unconstitutional.
“This is a great victory for free speech,” said First Liberty President & CEO Kelly Shackelford. “The Supreme Court sent a clear message to state governments that the Constitution actually means what it says when it protects the free speech of its citizens.”
The law barred professional counselors, including petitioner Kaley Chiles, from engaging in religiously based talk therapy with her clients if she did not provide the “gender affirming” perspective the state requires. Chiles was represented by our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom.
First Liberty filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Heartbeat International, a Christian nonprofit that supports the pro-life cause through pregnancy resource centers. Heartbeat expressed concern with state efforts—like the one in Colorado—to restrict certain speech, including religious speech, simply because it is adjacent to medical practice.
The decision is a huge win for therapists and providers who offer care, advice and counsel from a religious perspective. It ensures that government officials don’t impose their ideology on private conversations between medical professionals and patients.
With $15 Million, Radical Group Wants to Buy a Supreme Court Vacancy
by Jorge Gomez, Director of Content Strategy
There are no vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court at the moment, and therefore no nominee pending. But radical groups are ready to pour in millions of dollars to block anyone nominated to the Court by President Trump.
Demand Justice put out a statement last week announcing the “launch of a $3 million campaign to oppose an anticipated Trump Supreme Court nomination this year—before a nominee is even named.”
“The campaign will aggressively make the case by tying any nominee directly to Trump’s corrupt agenda,” the statement read, “and ensuring that Senate Republicans in competitive states, and Senate Republicans with a legacy to protect, pay a political price for rubber-stamping a personal loyalist to a lifetime appointment.”
$3 million is just the start. According to the organization, they’ll “scale up to a $15 million campaign when the vacancy is announced.”
“If Trump is handed another Supreme Court vacancy, we must be clear-eyed and ready to make it an uphill battle,” said Ezra Levin, a co-executive director of Indivisible, a group partnering with Demand Justice. “This will be a defining political battle, and we intend to make sure the stakes are clear to everyone.”
Former Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris quickly took to social media to back the plan.
“We must be clear eyed about what is at stake with the Supreme Court right now,” Harris posted on X. “We cannot allow Donald Trump to hand pick one, if not two, additional justices. The nation’s highest court must be stopped from becoming even more beholden to him.”
We must be clear eyed about what is at stake with the Supreme Court right now. We cannot allow Donald Trump to hand pick one, if not two, additional justices. The nation’s highest court must be stopped from becoming even more beholden to him.https://t.co/RF8GJYwptz
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) April 3, 2026
Pundits and analysts speculate that there could be a vacancy coming soon, and possibly even two. Associate Justice Samuel Alito—who turned 76 on April 1—was briefly hospitalized last month, fueling rumors he could hang up his robe in the near future. A statement from the Supreme Court Public Information Office clarified the hospitalization was “out of an abundance of caution” at the recommendation of Alito’s security team.
Others say Justice Clarence Thomas could also step down, having served since 1991 and being the oldest justice currently on the Court. At this point, neither justice has given any public indication they’ll depart.
Nonetheless, Demand Justice’s “pre-emptive” campaign highlights the urgency of what at stake in our country right now, especially at the U.S. Supreme Court.
First, Americans should take note that the radical Supreme Court Coup is still lurking.
Blocking a Supreme Court nominee appears more like a short-term strategy for judicial activists. Because if you know anything about Demand Justice, you’ll know this is really about a broader scheme to radically reform the Supreme Court in favor of the Left, especially if there’s a power shift in who controls the presidency and Senate after the 2028 Election.
“This is a clear-eyed, remorseless strategy on the left to remove an obstacle to an equally radical agenda,” explains law professor and attorney Jonathan Turley.
“Harris reportedly supports court packing and could use radical groups like Demand Justice to push through an expansion of the court to produce an immediate liberal majority if Democrats take power,” he added.
For the past few years, court “reform” advocates like Demand Justice have put forward proposals that would destroy judicial independence and the constitutional order. They poured millions of dollars trying to convince the public that these “reforms” would “fix” the Supreme Court.
Those include court-packing, ending life tenure for federal judges and giving Congress the power to oversee the Court’s ethics code. Some proposals would prevent the Court from hearing certain cases, effectively destroying the Court’s power of judicial review.
They also launched a wave of attacks against the Court’s conservative justices. They levied fabricated accusations, supposed “ethics” scandals aimed at smearing the credibility of the justices so they can also undermine the authority of the Court’s rulings.
Radical “court reform” is not likely to happen soon. The prospect that court-packing or other “reform” legislation passes is slim to none. But the Far Left hasn’t stopped pushing for it. they’ve simply changed strategy and are laying the groundwork to bring back the Supreme Court Coup should they regain political power.
Additionally, it looks like it’ll be a real dog fight to get the next Supreme Court justice confirmed, given the millions of dollars opponents are ready to pour in. And it’ll be even more intense if that vacancy happens before the November midterm elections.
On paper, The President and his party should be able to get their nominee through. They have a 53-person majority in the Senate, giving them the simple majority needed to get a nomination confirmed.
But it’s not just about having the numbers and lining up the votes. It’s about both quantity and quality. In other words, the administration is going to have nominate someone who—as the saying goes—“checks all the boxes.”
And if there’s one box that the next nominee must check off, it’s the one on religious liberty.
Whomever the President picks, he needs to make sure it’s someone with a proven record of defending America’s First Freedom. We need a rock-ribbed, principled jurist who will decide cases based on the original text and meaning of the Constitution.
Over the past eight years, the Supreme Court has issued several opinions protecting religious liberty and other issues of major importance to people of faith, including life and free speech.
On religious freedom, we’re witnessing perhaps the most significant shift in the law in more than 50 years. Of the 11 victories that First Liberty has had at the Supreme Court since 2018, several have been landmark rulings that overturned decades of bad precedent and put new ones in place that will safeguard the free exercise of religion for generations.
These results were dramatically affected by the makeup of the Court, especially by the three justices added under the first Trump administration.
We can’t emphasize enough the importance of having justices on the Court who will rule according to principle—namely, the principle that the Constitution and our nation’s laws should be interpreted and applied as written. There’s no question about it. If the highest court can get another justice who’s solid on religious freedom, there’s tremendous hope for the future of all our freedoms.
First Liberty is ready to take action if a Supreme Court vacancy occurs.
Through our Judicial Legacy Project, we’re already providing the administration and Senate leaders with trusted information on judicial nominations. A Supreme Court vacancy will be no exception to our efforts. We’re ready on our end to launch a full-scale campaign and continue being a trusted resource for leaders and decision makers in our nation’s capital.
And the same goes if radical court “reform” resurfaces. First Liberty is actively working to counter any future attempts to destroy our judicial system. Our team is working with the top scholars, professors and legal minds to ensure that more Americans learn about the dangers of court-packing and other schemes. We’ll continue doing everything we can to protect the integrity of the courts and judicial independence.
Editors’ Picks | Stories Around the Nation
Coalition Wants to Block Religious Liberty Commission Report – Baptist News Global
Colorado Could Return to Supreme Court with Catholic Preschool Discrimination Case – Washington Examiner
Treasury and IRS to Provide Guidance to Religious Organizations – U.S. Department of the Treasury
The Chaplain Crisis: Pentagon’s Religious Accommodation Battles Reach Boiling Point – TV
Opinion: Why We Need Strengthened Religious Liberty Protections – America First Policy Institute
 |
|
|
