ACLU Supports Right of Iowa Students to Distribute Christian Literature at School

KNOX COUNTY, Tenn. — Six Knox County taxpayers dedicated to supporting public education and the separation of church and state filed a motion today in federal court seeking to intervene in a case about the constitutionality of a religious public charter school that is attempting to open in Knox County. The lawsuit, The Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville v. Knox County Board of Education, was filed in November 2025 by a religious organization that wants to run a public charter school—funded by taxpayers—that, according to the school’s own complaint, would provide an “explicitly biblical and Christian education.” The proposed intervenors are seeking to join the lawsuit on the side of the defendants, the Knox County Board of Education and its members. They oppose Wilberforce Academy’s effort to force the defendants to authorize and fund it as a religious public charter school. The proposed parties are public school parents and faith and community leaders who object to their tax dollars funding a public charter school that will indoctrinate students into one religion, in violation of Tennessee and federal law and our nation’s longstanding commitment to the separation of church and state. They want to ensure that public schools remain secular and open to all. “Public education is part of the common good. A religious charter school would be at odds with the need to ensure public schools remain appropriate for and welcoming to students of all faiths, families, and backgrounds,” said proposed intervenor Amanda Collins, a retired school psychologist and parent of Knox County public school students. “And it would divert already limited public funds and scarce resources away from other public schools in Knox County. We can’t let this happen.” The motion to intervene explains that charter schools are part of Knox County’s public education system, and as such, cannot advance religious doctrine. Like all public schools, charter schools must accept and serve all students and may not be run as religious schools. The proposed parties are asking the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee to allow them to participate in the case in order to safeguard these interests. “The Reformed tradition in which I am formed has long supported the separation of church and state, believing that our faith, and all faiths, are best supported when they are free of undue state interference. This is why I object to the use of tax dollars to support religious education of any kind, including my own religion. Religious education is the job of churches, denominations, and private religious schools,” said the Rev. Dr. Richard Coble, another proposed intervenor, who is a pastor at Westminster Presbyterian Church in Knoxville and the parent of two Knox County public school students. The proposed parties are represented by Education Law Center, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, Freedom From Religion Foundation, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the law firm Morrison Foerster pro bono. The motion to intervene is available here: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2026/01/2026-01-27-21-motion-to-intervene.pdf

NEW ORLEANS — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, heard oral arguments in two cases challenging state laws in Louisiana and Texas that require public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom. The cases, Rev. Roake v. Brumley and Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District, raise fundamental questions about religious freedom and the separation of church and state guaranteed by the First Amendment. These arguments come nearly a year after a unanimous three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit ruled that Louisiana’s House Bill 71 is “plainly unconstitutional,” finding it directly contradicted long-standing Supreme Court precedent. That decision was vacated when the full court agreed to rehear the case en banc. Federal courts in Texas have likewise issued multiple preliminary injunctions blocking enforcement of Senate Bill 10, concluding that the law violates students’ First Amendment rights by forcing government-endorsed religious scripture on public-school children. The plaintiffs in both states are multifaith and nonreligious families who simply want their constitutional right to decide their children’s religious education respected by the government. They want their children’s public schools to remain welcoming and inclusive for their families and students of all backgrounds. “I send my children to public school to learn math, English, science, art, and so much more—but not to be evangelized by the state into its chosen religion,” said Rev. Jeff Sims (he/him) from Louisiana. “These religious displays send a message to my children and other students that people of some religious denominations are superior to others. This is religious favoritism and it’s not only dangerous, but runs counter to my Presbyterian values of inclusion and equality.” “No one faith should be canonized as more holy than others. Yet Texas legislators are imposing the Ten Commandments on public-school children,” said Rabbi Mara Nathan (she/her) from Texas. “Though they are a sacred text to me and many others, the Ten Commandments has no place on the walls of public-school classrooms. Children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools." The Louisiana plaintiffs in Roake v. Brumley are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Louisiana, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. The Texas plaintiffs in Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Texas, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. “Public schools are meant to educate, not evangelize,” said Daniel Mach (he/him), director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “When the government mandates the display of a specific religious text in every classroom, it crosses a constitutional line by pressuring students and families to conform to the state’s preferred religious doctrine. The First Amendment protects the freedom of every family to decide matters of faith for themselves, and today’s arguments underscore why we must uphold that principle in our public schools.” “We are proud to be in front of the 5th Circuit representing Texas families who are challenging forced Ten Commandments displays in public school classrooms,” said Sarah Corning (she/her), attorney at the ACLU of Texas. “S.B. 10 is a blatant violation of our First Amendment rights and sends students the message that they only belong if they follow the government’s chosen religion. Texas schools are not Sunday schools, and the Constitution protects Texans’ right to decide how or whether they practice their faith. Texas families want and deserve better from our public schools.” “Public schools exist to educate, not indoctrinate,” said Alanah Odoms (she/her), executive director of the ACLU of Louisiana. “They must remain spaces where all children are safe, free, and respected—regardless of their family’s beliefs. Religion is a personal choice, made by families, not something imposed by politicians through our public schools.” “We appreciate the Court’s time and its thoughtful engagement during today’s argument. This case centers on a fundamental constitutional principle: Families—not the government—must retain the right to decide whether and how their children engage with religion,” said Jon Youngwood, Co-Chair of Simpson Thacher’s global Litigation Department. “The laws at issue disrupt that longstanding protection, and we look to the court to safeguard these core First Amendment guarantees.” “The imposition of a particular religious teaching infringes the rights of students with minority beliefs and no belief,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor (she/her), co-president at the Freedom From Religion Foundation. “The Louisiana and Texas state governments cannot be allowed to ride roughshod over those who do not adhere to the dominant religion.” “Every federal court that’s ruled in these cases so far has said the same thing: Requiring public schools to display a state-mandated version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom is unconstitutional. We urge the Fifth Circuit to affirm those rulings,” said Rachel Laser (she/her), president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “Families – not politicians or public-school officials – get to decide how, if and when their children engage with religion.”

The ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit urging the court to affirm that religious employers such as Catholic Relief Services (CRS) are not exempt from complying with employment discrimination laws.

SAN ANTONIO, Texas — In a win for religious freedom and church-state separation, a federal judge today issued a preliminary injunction requiring certain public school districts in Texas to remove Ten Commandments displays by Dec. 1, 2025, and prohibiting them from posting new displays. The order is in response to a new lawsuit filed Sept. 22 by a group of 15 multifaith and nonreligious families with children attending schools in the districts. In his order, U.S. District Judge Orlando L. Garcia wrote that “displaying the Ten Commandments on the wall of a public-school classroom as set forth in S.B. 10 violates the Establishment Clause.” He added, “It is impractical, if not impossible, to prevent Plaintiffs from being subjected to unwelcome religious displays without enjoining Defendants from enforcing S.B. 10 across their districts." The order came in the case Cribbs Ringer v. Comal Independent School District, which was filed after the defendant school districts installed or were about to install Ten Commandments posters. The districts were proceeding with the displays despite Judge Fred Biery’s Aug. 20 order in a separate lawsuit, Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights ISD, in which he called the Texas law requiring the displays “plainly unconstitutional.” After that order was issued, the organizations representing families in both lawsuits sent letters to all Texas school districts urging them not to implement the law. While today’s preliminary injunction directly applies to the defendant school districts named in the Cribbs Ringer lawsuit, the organizations behind the lawsuit are urging all Texas school districts not to implement S.B. 10. All school districts, even those that are not parties in either ongoing lawsuit, have an independent obligation to respect students’ and families’ rights under the U.S. Constitution, which supersedes state law. The plaintiffs in both cases are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. “I am relieved that as a result of today's ruling, my children, who are among a small number of Jewish children at their schools, will no longer be continually subjected to religious displays,” said plaintiff Lenee Bien-Willner (she/her). “The government has no business interfering with parental decisions about matters of faith.” “Today’s ruling is yet another affirmation of what Texans already know: The First Amendment guarantees families and faith communities – not the government – the right to instill religious beliefs in our children,” said Chloe Kempf (she/her), staff attorney for the ACLU of Texas. “Our schools are for education, not evangelization. This ruling protects thousands of Texas students from ostracization, bullying, and state-mandated religious coercion. Every school district in Texas is now on notice that implementing S.B. 10 violates their students’ constitutional rights.” “Once again, a federal court has recognized that the Constitution bars public schools from forcing religious scripture on students,” said Daniel Mach (he/him), director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “This decision is a victory for religious liberty and a reminder that government officials shouldn’t pay favorites with faith.” “All Texas public school districts should heed the court’s clear warning: It’s plainly unconstitutional to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms,” said Rachel Laser (she/her), president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “Families throughout Texas and across the country get to decide how and when their children engage with religion – not politicians or public-school officials.” “We're extremely happy to have secured this victory for the plaintiff families we represent,” said Sam Grover (he/him), senior counsel, Freedom From Religion Foundation. “But Texas never should have put parents and students in this position in the first place. The law is quite clear that pushing religion on students in public school is unconstitutional.” “We are grateful to the court for its swift and decisive action,” said Jon Youngwood (he/him), global co-chair of Simpson Thacher’s Litigation Department. “This ruling reaffirms a foundational principle: families—not public schools—have the right to determine how and when their children engage with matters of faith. The Constitution protects that choice, and schools should not be impeding it.”