Latest news with #FirstLibertyInstitute
Fox News
a day ago
- Health
- Fox News
How Florida became America's leading religious-freedom defender under DeSantis: report
The Sunshine State ranks as the nation's number one defender of religious liberty out of all 50 states, according to the First Liberty Institute's fourth annual Religious Liberty in the States (RLS) index. For the first time, Florida tops the national rankings, followed by Montana, Illinois, Ohio and Mississippi. Illinois and Mississippi have garnered a spot in the top five every year since the index was first released by the First Liberty Institute's Center for Religion, Culture & Democracy (CRCD) in 2022. The index uses a detailed scoring system measuring legal protections and ranking states based on the percentage of possible safeguards they have adopted. This year, with 2025's rankings, nearly 55 percentage points separates Florida from the last-place state, West Virginia, which has been last on the index for three years in a row. "We find that the states are laboratories of religious liberty where different protections for free exercise can be implemented and tested," CRCD Executive Director Jordan Ballor wrote in an introduction for the 2025 index. "One of the major goals of the RLS project is to raise awareness of what different states are doing. There are positive lessons to be learned from this experimentation, as states that have been at the vanguard of protecting religious liberty can serve as exemplars for states that have lagged behind." The index's accompanying report points out that Florida "is an exemplar" for how state lawmakers can improve their protections around religious freedom. According to the report, the Sunshine State has improved nearly 20 percentage points since the first RLS index was released in 2022. Much of this improvement came from legislation passed in 2023 strengthening religious protections that allow healthcare providers to refuse to participate in medical procedures or services, such as abortion or sterilization, based on their religious or moral beliefs. The report also pointed to Florida's passage of legislation in 2022 protecting houses of worship from discriminatory treatment during pandemics and other emergencies. "Florida holds several #1 rankings, leading the nation in education, economy, and tourism – and now, Florida is #1 in religious liberty," said Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. "We're grateful for this recognition from the First Liberty Institute, which has just named Florida the number one state in the nation for protecting religious liberty." "This year's findings show clearly that states taking legislative action are pulling ahead," added Kelly Shackelford, president, CEO and chief counsel at First Liberty. "Under the leadership of Gov. DeSantis, Florida passed real laws that protect real people, and now the Sunshine State is the national leader in protecting religious liberty. It's time for more states to follow Gov. DeSantis's example and adopt strong religious liberty laws." While Florida was pointed to in the RLS index as an "exemplar," the report stated that religious freedom was becoming increasingly "tenuous" in the blue state of Illinois. The move downward for the Land of Lincoln was not because the state repealed protections, but mainly because it has not implemented new protections that other states, like Florida, have, the report noted. Per the 2025 RLS report, almost all of Illinois' protections came when the state was more conservative between 1934 and 1998. In an effort to demonstrate the dangers of "complacency," the report also pointed to Colorado when Republicans "routinely" had control of both houses of the state legislature. The environment was friendly toward religious liberty, but lawmakers did not pass much in the way of protections, according to the report. It said the state's complacency contributed to Colorado's "abysmal" 43rd-place finish in the 2024 RLS rankings and 34th finish in the 2025 rankings released Monday. The First Liberty Institute said the results of the 2024 election may give some people the idea that passing laws protecting religious liberty is not as important, but the conservative Christian legal group warned this is "emphatically not the case," noting that data shows passing such laws is just as critical amid a "favorable" political climate.
Winnipeg Free Press
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
Supreme Court to consider reviving lawsuit restricting evangelizing in small Mississippi town
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Thursday it will consider whether to revive a lawsuit from a man barred from evangelizing outside a small-town Mississippi amphitheater after authorities say he shouted insults at people over a loudspeaker. Gabriel Olivier, an evangelical Christian, says restricting him from public property violated his religious and free speech rights, but a legal Catch-22 has barred him from challenging the law in court. Lower courts found he couldn't file a civil-rights lawsuit because he'd been arrested, and instead needed to file under habeas corpus, a legal remedy open to prisoners. But because he was ticketed rather than imprisoned, his lawyers say that option wasn't open either, effectively denying him a day in court. The city of Brandon, Mississippi, on the other hand, says the restrictions aren't about religious speech, but rather about limiting disturbances caused when he and his group yelled insults like 'Jezebel,' 'nasty,' and 'drunkards' at people passing by. The ordinance restricts demonstrations near the amphitheater but does allow him to preach from a designated 'protest zone,' and has already survived another lawsuit, the city said. The city says the case is about Olivier and his group's 'desire to have their preferred method of protest, without regard for the rights or interests of anyone else.' Olivier's attorneys say he was engaging in respectful and protected speech at the time of his arrest, and the case centers on a key legal issue affecting free speech across the political spectrum. Sundays Kevin Rollason's Sunday newsletter honouring and remembering lives well-lived in Manitoba. 'Every American has First Amendment rights to free speech; and every American has a right to their day in court,' said Kelly Shackelford, president and CEO for First Liberty Institute, which is representing him along with attorney Allyson Ho of the firm Gibson Dunn. 'Both of these rights were violated for Gabe Olivier. The Supreme Court will now decide whether those rights will be protected for all Americans.' The court is expected to hear arguments in the fall.
San Francisco Chronicle
03-07-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Supreme Court to consider reviving lawsuit restricting evangelizing in small Mississippi town
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Thursday it will consider whether to revive a lawsuit from a man barred from evangelizing outside a small-town Mississippi amphitheater after authorities say he shouted insults at people over a loudspeaker. Gabriel Olivier, an evangelical Christian, says restricting him from public property violated his religious and free speech rights, but a legal Catch-22 has barred him from challenging the law in court. Lower courts found he couldn't file a civil-rights lawsuit because he'd been arrested, and instead needed to file under habeas corpus, a legal remedy open to prisoners. But because he was ticketed rather than imprisoned, his lawyers say that option wasn't open either, effectively denying him a day in court. The city of Brandon, Mississippi, on the other hand, says the restrictions aren't about religious speech, but rather about limiting disturbances caused when he and his group yelled insults like 'Jezebel,' 'nasty,' and 'drunkards" at people passing by. The ordinance restricts demonstrations near the amphitheater but does allow him to preach from a designated 'protest zone," and has already survived another lawsuit, the city said. The city says the case is about Olivier and his group's 'desire to have their preferred method of protest, without regard for the rights or interests of anyone else.' Olivier's attorneys say he was engaging in respectful and protected speech at the time of his arrest, and the case centers on a key legal issue affecting free speech across the political spectrum. 'Every American has First Amendment rights to free speech; and every American has a right to their day in court,' said Kelly Shackelford, president and CEO for First Liberty Institute, which is representing him along with attorney Allyson Ho of the firm Gibson Dunn. 'Both of these rights were violated for Gabe Olivier. The Supreme Court will now decide whether those rights will be protected for all Americans.' The court is expected to hear arguments in the fall.
Hamilton Spectator
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Hamilton Spectator
Supreme Court to consider reviving lawsuit restricting evangelizing in small Mississippi town
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Thursday it will consider whether to revive a lawsuit from a man barred from evangelizing outside a small-town Mississippi amphitheater after authorities say he shouted insults at people over a loudspeaker. Gabriel Olivier, an evangelical Christian, says restricting him from public property violated his religious and free speech rights, but a legal Catch-22 has barred him from challenging the law in court. Lower courts found he couldn't file a civil-rights lawsuit because he'd been arrested, and instead needed to file under habeas corpus, a legal remedy open to prisoners. But because he was ticketed rather than imprisoned, his lawyers say that option wasn't open either, effectively denying him a day in court. The city of Brandon, Mississippi, on the other hand, says the restrictions aren't about religious speech, but rather about limiting disturbances caused when he and his group yelled insults like 'Jezebel,' 'nasty,' and 'drunkards' at people passing by. The ordinance restricts demonstrations near the amphitheater but does allow him to preach from a designated 'protest zone,' and has already survived another lawsuit, the city said. The city says the case is about Olivier and his group's 'desire to have their preferred method of protest, without regard for the rights or interests of anyone else.' Olivier's attorneys say he was engaging in respectful and protected speech at the time of his arrest, and the case centers on a key legal issue affecting free speech across the political spectrum. 'Every American has First Amendment rights to free speech; and every American has a right to their day in court,' said Kelly Shackelford, president and CEO for First Liberty Institute, which is representing him along with attorney Allyson Ho of the firm Gibson Dunn. 'Both of these rights were violated for Gabe Olivier. The Supreme Court will now decide whether those rights will be protected for all Americans.' The court is expected to hear arguments in the fall. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
EXCLUSIVE: Legal institute celebrates SCOTUS decision, declares 'religious liberty is alive and well'
EXCLUSIVE: A legal organization whose mission it is to defend the religious liberty of Americans has called the Supreme Court's 9-0 ruling in favor of the Catholic Charities Bureau (CCB) "a huge moment for religious liberty in America," and a clear rejection of government overreach into religious life. "This was not a hard call," Tiffany Dunkin, a legal fellow and attorney with the First Liberty Institute, emphasized in an interview with Fox News Digital, citing Thursday's unanimous SCOTUS decision to strike down Wisconsin's attempt to withhold a religious tax exemption because the CCB does not proselytize or serve only Catholics. "What Wisconsin was doing… they were saying that the Catholic Charities was not a religious institution because they did not proselytize or serve people of their own faith," Dunkin explained. Supreme Court Rules Wisconsin Unconstitutionally Discriminated Against Christian Charity "What they were doing was deciding what it means to be religious," she added. "And the First Amendment prohibits the government from doing that." The case, Catholic Charities Bureau Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, questioned whether faith-based nonprofits that provide public services are "religious enough" to receive the same benefits as churches or houses of worship. Read On The Fox News App Catholic Charities, affiliated with the Diocese of Superior, Wisconsin, provides critical care services for people with disabilities and mental health needs. Wisconsin argued those acts were not "primarily religious." The Supreme Court disagreed. Scotus Rulings This Term Could Strengthen Religious Rights Protections, Expert Says Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing the opinion for the court, stated clearly that the government has no authority to assess or rank the religious nature of charitable work. Dunkin said the consequences of the ruling go far beyond Wisconsin. "This is actually a pretty ongoing problem across the country," she noted. "It's not just Wisconsin. First Liberty Institute represents Dad's Place in Bryan, Ohio… they're saying that because you're running a 24-7 homeless shelter, you're not [religious]." Other clients of Plano, Texas-based First Liberty in Colorado and Arizona have faced similar arguments from local governments, which question whether providing food, clothing or shelter to those in need is inherently religious. "Even though there are churches doing this kind of work, the governments are saying, 'Well, you're not religious enough,'" Dunkin said. The court's language in the ruling, Dunkin pointed out, "affirms what the Supreme Court has said for nearly a century," that the government cannot choose which expressions of faith are valid. "This sends a great message to people of all religions and all charitable organizations," she said. "The government… cannot intrude into telling you exactly what you can and can't do, whether you're religious or not religious, in order to receive a government benefit or participate in society." Had SCOTUS ruled the other way, Dunkin warned, it would have "grave implications" for religious charities and ministries nationwide. "It would allow the government to step into the religious doctrine of all faiths more than our Founding Fathers ever intended," she said. "The government cannot step in and get involved in deciding and picking and choosing between one type of religious activity and another." When asked what this means for churches and ministries on the ground, Dunkin's answer was clear: "They should feel emboldened to continue to do what they feel called to do by their religious faith… especially in a charitable sense." And for those who may see this as a one-off legal win? Not so fast. "I see this really as two different things," she said. "One, an affirmance of what the First Amendment has always stood for… but of course, going forward, we do hope and we're encouraged that religious liberty in America is alive and well. And of course, First Liberty Institute is here to continue to fight for that."Original article source: EXCLUSIVE: Legal institute celebrates SCOTUS decision, declares 'religious liberty is alive and well'
