Trump admin now lets federal workers spread religion at work. Faith groups react

President Donald Trump speaks to a crowd outside The White House on May 1 during a National Day of Prayer event. Screengrab from The White House Video

Originally published July 29, 2025 for the Miami Herald

New guidance from President Donald Trump’s administration outlining how federal employees may engage with faith practices in the workplace garnered mixed reactions from religious groups, with some raising concern about the blurring boundary between church and state.

The guidelines, announced by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in a July 28 memo, allow federal employees to display religious items, pray and attempt to spread their religion at work, so long as these practices “are not harassing in nature.”

The memo is the latest in a series of efforts by the Trump administration to bring religion to the forefront of American society. In February, Trump signed an executive order aiming to end “anti-Christian bias” in the federal government and established a White House Faith Office, McClatchy News reported.

“President Trump is committed to reaffirming ‘America’s unique and beautiful tradition of religious liberty,’ including by directing ‘the executive branch to vigorously enforce the historic and robust protections for religious liberty enshrined in Federal law,’” Scott Kupor, director of the OPM, said in the memo.

Focus on the Family, a Christian ministry dedicated to supporting families, celebrated the memo in a July 28 post on X, formerly known as Twitter.

“What an encouraging moment!” the organization said. “As pressure mounts from every side to compromise our values, we are glad to see our country’s leadership standing firm on our constitutional right to express our faith!”

Other religious organizations, including the Freedom From Religion Foundation, called the move “unconstitutional,” and said the memo could make employees feel forced to participate in religious discussion when there is a power imbalance in the workplace, according to a July 28 statement.

“This is the implementation of Christian nationalism in our federal government,” Annie Laurie Gaylor, FFRF co-president, said in the statement.

The Rev. Karen Georgia A. Thompson, general minister and president/CEO of the United Church of Christ, said in a July 29 statement the memo unfairly prioritizes Christianity in the workplace.

“At a time when Christian nationalists are seeking to rewrite the historic narratives from a standpoint of American exceptionalism, with disregard for religious, racial/ethnic and gender minorities, the memo threatens the very freedoms it appears to be reinforcing,” Thompson said.

While the guidelines mirror President Bill Clinton-era policies, that also allowed federal workers to speak about religion with each other and “attempt to persuade fellow employees of the correctness of their religious views,” they go against a Department of Labor precedent that said workers “who seek to proselytize in the workplace should cease doing so with respect to any individual who indicates that the communications are unwelcome.”

‘Un-American’ ICE raids on sacred spaces must end, says suit by religious groups

Originally published July 29, 2025 for the Miami Herald

Eleven religious groups are suing the Department of Homeland Security in response to a Trump administration policy reversal ending a decades-long practice protecting houses of worship, schools and hospitals from immigration officials looking to enforce action.

The lawsuit, filed July 28 by Democracy Forward and the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs on behalf of the religious groups — including American Baptist Churches USA, Quaker groups in San Francisco Friends Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends and five Evangelical Lutheran Churches across the country — asks the court to declare the policy reversal unconstitutional and end ICE raids in sacred spaces.

“(The) rescission of longstanding protections for houses of worship and other sensitive religious locations is not just harmful and un-American; it violates federal law,” the complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, states.

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told McClatchy News in a July 28 email the administration views the policy reversal as a way to protect those spaces from “criminals” living in the country illegally.

“DHS’s directive gives our law enforcement the ability to do their jobs,” she said.

The policy reversal was seen by some as controversial, and multiple faith groups — including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Association of Evangelicals — issued statements condemning the move, saying it stopped some congregants from attending religious services.

And despite promises by the administration to remove the worst criminals, ICE deportation data from Jan. 1 to June 24 shows most people who were removed or detained didn’t have a violent criminal record, CBS News reported.

“Raids in churches and sacred spaces violate decades of norms in both Democratic and Republican administrations, core constitutional protections, and basic human decency,” Skye Perryman, president & CEO of Democracy Forward, said in a July 28 email shared with McClatchy News.

ICE raids bring fear, disruption to religious communities, suit says

The new immigration policy has sown fear among religious communities, causing a drop in attendance as reports of people being detained on and near houses of worship continue, according to the complaint.

In June, ICE agents brandished a rifle at a pastor while seizing a man outside of a church near Los Angeles, according to the complaint.

“Today was a very emotional day,” Downey Memorial Christian Church leaders said in a June 11 Facebook post after the incident. “A couple of our pastors and other community members witnessed a man being detained and taken away by men that were masked and armed.”

Church leaders were unsure at the time what law enforcement agency the men were from, and they wouldn’t identify themselves, according to the post.

Some congregations have pivoted to meet secretly, holding baptisms — occasions previously seen as something to celebrate in community — in private, according to the complaint.

“The open joy and spiritual restoration of communal worship has been replaced by isolation, concealment, and fear,” the complaint states.

More lawsuits against immigration policy reversal

The lawsuit is the latest in a slew of actions taken by some religious groups against the new immigration policy.

In January, five Quaker groups filed a similar lawsuit against the DHS, citing the cancellation of some worship services due to fears instilled by the policy, McClatchy News reported.

Shortly after, more than two dozen Christian and Jewish groups filed a lawsuit against the policy, saying it “infringes on the groups’ religious freedom,” the Associate Press reported.

“We cannot worship freely if some of us are living in fear,” the Most Rev. Sean Rowe, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, which joined the lawsuit, told the outlet.

This new lawsuit states the policy reversal is a violation of the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.

“The court should hold the new policy unlawful and order appropriate preliminary and permanent relief,” according to the complaint.

What is the Johnson Amendment? What to know as IRS changes tax exemptions

Originally published July 9, 2025 for the Miami Herald

A longstanding tax exemption preventing nonprofit organizations from engaging in political campaign activity that favors individual candidates has been reinterpreted — signaling that religious organizations may now be excluded from the rule.

The decades-old Johnson Amendment does not apply to speech by houses of worship to its congregation through “customary channels of communication,” the IRS said in a July 7 court filing in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

The filing is an effort to resolve an August lawsuit against the IRS in which religious groups, including the National Religious Broadcasters, Intercessors for America and two Texas churches, take aim at the Johnson Amendment, stating that not being able to endorse a candidate is a violation of their First Amendment rights.

McClatchy News reached out to the IRS on July 8 but did not receive an immediate response. The National Religious Broadcasters told McClatchy News it is awaiting the judge’s decision on the filing before publicly commenting.

What is the Johnson Amendment?

In 1954, Congress approved an amendment by Sen. Lyndon Johnson that banned nonprofit organizations from engaging in political campaign activity on behalf of individual candidates.

Although, according to the amendment, 501(c)(3) nonprofits are unable to endorse political candidates, they are not excluded from all political activity. A limited amount of lobbying and advocacy is allowed as well as nonpartisan voter registration and education, according to guidance from the IRS.

Aside from a few cases, the tax rule has rarely been enforced against houses of worship that have a “special case” because of the First Amendment, according to experts.

In 2017, President Trump vowed to repeal the Johnson Amendment and issued an executive order that said the Department of Treasury wouldn’t take action against religious organizations for speaking about political issues from a religious perspective.

What does the reinterpretation mean exactly?

While the IRS’s reinterpretation indicates leniency on the Johnson Amendment for religious organizations, some experts cautioned against overinterpreting the document.

Edward Zelinsky, professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, who specializes in tax law, told McClatchy News the document technically only reaches the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

“It is a compromise in a district court in Texas that will have as a legal matter no presidential basis. This is not a federal judge writing an opinion,” Zelinsky said.

Roger Colinvaux, a professor at the Columbus School of Law, whose expertise is in tax law for nonprofits, agreed and said religious organizations should be cautious with the filing because the language leaves room for uncertainty.

“Nowhere in this consent judgment does the IRS use the word endorse, so it’s really not clear from the terms of this exactly how the law is changing, or what the IRS’s new interpretation of the law is,” Colinvaux told McClatchy News.

While the filing signals an invitation for houses of worship to endorse candidates — seeing that it’s unlikely the Trump administration will enforce the tax rule in those spaces — there’s still a risk of losing their tax-exempt status as long as the IRS doesn’t have any binding guidance, he said.

Additionally, if a future administration has a different approach to the amendment, it could retroactively go after a church that it views as having overstepped the Johnson Amendment so long as the action is within a three-year statute of limitations, Colinvaux said.

Many experts, including Zelinsky and Colinvaux, said they see this filing as more symbolic than as something that changes a law and compared it to the 2017 executive order under the Trump administration.

“This new interpretation by the Trump administration — which he advocated in 2017 — is more of a sop to his conservative religious base which has been clamoring for this for years,” Steven Green, professor at the Willamette University College of Law, told McClatchy News in a July 8 email. “It’s simply more blurring of the line between church and state.”

Since being elected to a second term in January, the Trump administration has made a series of moves to “bring religion back,” including reviving the White House Faith Office and establishing a Religious Liberty Commission.

Why does it matter?

Some critics worry this filing might turn houses of worship into tools for political campaigns.

“Now that the Trump administration has opened the door to pastors and houses of worship explicitly backing candidates for office, all bets are off,” Fish Stark, executive director of the American Humanist Association, said in a July 8 statement. “There will be little to stop billionaires from funneling money through churches to buy our elections.”

Others, like Miranda Perry Fleischer, a nonprofit law and tax law professor at the University of San Diego School of Law, said they believe it will make it more difficult for houses of worship that want to stay neutral about political candidates.

While religious organizations and other nonprofits have always been involved in politics by speaking about the values they have, endorsing specific candidates crosses a line between political advocacy and political intervention, Fleischer told McClatchy News.

She said this new interpretation may also encourage other nonprofits to “push the boundaries” of the Johnson Amendment.

“Why should only people whose desire to change the world is motivated by religion be allowed to have their nonprofit be involved in politics?” Fleischer said.

Although the filing seems to open the door for houses of worship to endorse political candidates without compromising their tax-exempt status, experts are still looking out for clearer guidance from the IRS for any concrete change to take place in churches across the country.

Seven families sue to block AR law requiring Ten Commandments display in schools

Originally published June 16, 2025 for the Kansas City Star

Seven Arkansas families of varying faiths are suing the state to block a new law requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms and libraries.

The families said the new law “pressures students into religious observance” of the state’s preference and sends a “religiously divisive message” to students, according to the complaint, filed June 11 in the Western District of Arkansas.

Four Northwest Arkansas school districts — Fayetteville, Springdale, Bentonville and Siloam Springs — are cited as defendants in the complaint.

“We are reviewing the lawsuit and considering our options,” a spokesperson for the attorney general’s office told McClatchy News in a June 13 email.

In April, Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed a bill ordering the display of a Protestant version of the Ten Commandments and the motto “In God We Trust” into law.

The complaint asks for an order declaring the law a violation of the First Amendment and an order to enjoin the school districts from complying with the act.

“This law is part of the nationwide Christian Nationalist scheme to win favor for one set of religious views over all others and nonreligion — in a country that promises religious freedom,” Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said in a June 11 news release. AU is one of the organizations representing the families, according to the lawsuit.

What families said about the new law

The families bringing the lawsuit represent several differing religious beliefs, including Judaism, atheism and Unitarian Universalism, according to the complaint.

Many of them believe the required display will signal to their children that it is wrong to not be Christian or that they are outsiders for not sharing the same faith, attorneys said.

One of the families of Jewish background said the display will make it difficult for their children to “maintain and express their Jewish identity.”

While they recognize the Ten Commandments as part of their faith, the Protestant version lawmakers want displayed in public schools is contrary to their beliefs, according to the complaint.

“They believe strongly that it is important to teach their children about the Ten Commandments within the context of the Jewish faith,” attorneys said.

Another family, who practices Humanist and atheist traditions, said the displays will remind their child of previous trauma experienced at school due to religious proselytizing.

According to the complaint, a teacher at a different public school got mad at their child “for not believing in God” and told them “the family’s beliefs were wrong.”

This caused the child to feel pressured to “pretend to believe in God while at school,” attorneys said.

“Being subjected every day to the Ten Commandments in every classroom and the library will remind (the child) of this trauma and further pressure (them) to observe, meditate on, venerate, and adopt the religious directives, as well as to suppress any expression of (their) nonreligious beliefs and background,” attorneys said.

While the new law is set to take effect Aug. 5, the families have also filed a motion for preliminary injunction asking the court to temporarily prevent implementation while the lawsuit is pending, according to a news release.

Similar lawsuits filed

The Arkansas lawsuit is the latest in a string of federal cases examining the constitutional separation of church and state.

In May, groups sued the state of Texas over a similar law requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments, according to a May 29 American Civil Liberties Union news release.

In November, a federal district court blocked a Louisiana law ordering the Ten Commandments to be shown in public schools after nine multi-faith families filed a lawsuit, according to a Nov. 12 ACLU news release.

What do Americans think of Pope Leo XIV a month into his papacy? What poll finds

Originally published June 16, 2025 for the Miami Herald

A month into his papacy, Pope Leo XIV — the Wordle-playing, White Sox-loving, first American pope — maintains a high favorability rating among U.S. Catholics and the general public, a poll found.

Sixty-five percent of Catholics said they have a favorable impression of the new pope, compared with six percent who have an unfavorable view, according to a June 15 AP-NORC poll.

Twenty-nine percent of Catholics said they still didn’t know enough to say, the poll found.

The poll of 1,158 U.S. adults was taken June 5-9 and has a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

A plurality of the general public, 44%, also said they have a favorable view of Pope Leo, according to the poll.

Forty-six percent of Americans said they weren’t sure yet, and 10% said they had an unfavorable view, per the poll.

How does this compare to Pope Francis?

Support for Pope Leo mirrors support for his predecessor at the start of his pontificate, researchers said.

Forty-four percent of Americans had a positive view of Pope Francis, while 13% viewed him unfavorably and 42% weren’t sure, according to an October 2015 poll.

Pope Leo was elected head of the Holy See on May 8 after four rounds of voting.

What do Americans want from pope?

Before the conclave took place, many Catholics, 37%, said they wanted the next pope to have more conservative teachings, according to a poll, McClatchy News reported.

Twenty-one percent said they wanted to see more progressive teachings, per the poll.

In May, Americans were split on whether they thought the new pope was liberal or conservative, with 16% saying he is liberal and 12% saying he’s conservative, according to a poll, McClatchy reported.

Forty-three percent said they were not sure, the poll found.

Is Pope Leo XIV liberal or conservative? What Americans think, according to poll

Five days into the papacy of Pope Leo XIV, Americans are fairly split on whether they think he has liberal or conservative political beliefs, a new poll found. Screengrab from Vatican News' video of Pope Leo XIV's May 12 address to media professionals

Originally published May 13, 2025 for the Miami Herald

Americans are fairly split on where they think Pope Leo XIV lands politically, though a plurality believe he is less liberal than his predecessor, according to a new poll.

Pope Leo — formerly known as Cardinal Robert Prevost — took over the highest office in the Catholic Church on May 8 after four rounds of voting in a historic election that made him the first American pope.

In his first public appearances as head of the Holy See, religious experts and the general public have been keeping a close eye on any details — including language in his speeches, social media history and even his name choice — that may hint at how he will lead the 1.4 billion people making up the global Catholic Church.

A bulk of Americans, 43%, said they are not sure of Pope Leo’s political beliefs, while 16% said he is liberal and 12% said he is conservative, a recent Economist/YouGov poll found.

The poll of 1,786 U.S. adults was taken May 9-12 and has a margin of error of 3.3%.

Pointing to language used in his initial speech, experts told McClatchy News it seemed as if Pope Leo was indicating plans to extend Pope Francis’ legacy.

While 29% of Americans felt Francis had liberal political beliefs, the poll shows fewer Americans think the same about Leo. A similar share of U.S. adults think Francis and Leo have conservative political beliefs, 11% compared to 12%, respectively.

Many Americans, 47%, said they think the new pope will have some influence in the United States’ domestic affairs, according to the poll. Twenty-three percent said they didn’t think he would have any influence.

The poll also asked whether it was appropriate for the pope to try and influence domestic issues in the U.S. Forty-one percent said that was inappropriate, and 29% said it was acceptable, per the poll.

Twenty percent of U.S. adults identify as Catholics, according to data from Pew Research Center.

How popular is Pope Leo among Americans?

Forty-seven percent of Americans said Pope Leo was favorable, including 19% who said he was “very” favorable and 28% who said he was “somewhat” liked, according to the poll.

A small share of Americans, 12%, said the pope was unfavorable, and 41% said they didn’t know.

The poll also found that liberals and conservatives had relatively high approval ratings of the new pope, with liberals rating slightly higher at 59% compared with 41% for conservatives. Forty-nine percent of moderates said they favored Pope Leo, per the poll.

Early clues hint how Pope Leo may lead Catholic Church. What did experts notice?

Pope Leo XIV greets crowds gathered in the Vatican City on May 8 in his first appearance as the head of the Holy See. Screengrab from Vatican News video

Originally published May 9, 2025 for the Miami Herald

As Pope Leo XIV stepped out in front of cheering crowds outside of St. Peter’s Basilica to give his first speech as head of the Holy See, experts took note of a few subtle clues that may reveal what direction the Catholic Church will go under his leadership.

The historic election of Cardinal Robert Prevost — who took the name Pope Leo XIV after being appointed May 8 following the death of Pope Francis — was a surprise to many who didn’t expect the first American pope in the Church’s history to be chosen by this conclave.

But despite his nationality and the American flags waving across Vatican City upon hearing the news, Pope Leo did not speak in his native language or mention the United States during his first address, according to a Vatican News video. Instead, he spoke in Italian and then switched to Spanish in a brief greeting to his former diocese in Peru.

Some experts told McClatchy News they believed this was an intentional choice meant to demonstrate cosmopolitanism.

“Maybe what he was trying to do was to show he’s not just an American, but he’s the pope for the whole church,” the Rev. Thomas Rausch, who teaches Catholic theology at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, told McClatchy News.

Cristina Traina, professor at Fordham University who specializes in Catholic ethics, said she also thinks he was trying to speak globally rather than just focusing on the U.S.

While Trainia said she does think it was a deliberate choice to not speak in English in his first address, she also said it could have come down to how quickly everything was moving.

“He needed to make the choice between sticking to one language with a quick greeting to his friends in Peru, or speaking in multiple languages,” she said. “And the hurriedness of trying to get all this together in less than an hour may be one reason he decided, you know what, let’s stick to one language … rather than trying to speak in multiple languages.”

Pope Leo did begin mass in English on May 9 — his first full day as pontiff, a Vatican News video showed.

Another thing experts pointed out was the language he used in that initial speech.

“That first speech was just littered with the sorts of language that Francis used,” Traina said. “He wished peace to everyone, tuti, tuti, right? And he said that several times. That’s something Francis would often say.”

He also referenced the former pope directly twice, further indicating that he will likely continue Francis’ legacy, she said.

In a recent poll, a plurality of U.S. Catholics said they wanted the new pope to continue Francis’ teachings, McClatchy News reported.

The last and potentially most notable indicator of where the new pope may lead the church is in his name, experts said.

“I can’t stress the symbolic importance of his name,” Rausch said, adding that it calls to mind Pope Leo XIII, who’s remembered for his emphasis on social issues.

“(Leo XII’s) 1891 Rerum Novarum was about the importance of paying workers a living wage, a decent wage, and having decent hours, having safe working places, a right to form labor unions or labor associations,” he said. “... So I think that’s clearly going to be a clue to his papacy.”

Do US Catholics want a more progressive or conservative pope? What poll finds

Originally published May 7, 2025 for the Miami Herald

As over 130 voting cardinals enter the Sistine Chapel on May 7 to begin the secret process to elect the next head of the Holy See, a new poll finds that a plurality of U.S. Catholics want Pope Francis’ successor to continue his teachings.

The papal conclave includes the most electors ever — the bulk of them appointed by the late pope — and has no time limit to reach a two-thirds majority vote, CBS News reported.

While Pope Francis and Pope Benedict XVI were elected on the second day of voting, the longest conclave lasted nearly three years, according to the Vatican News, the official news portal of the Holy See. The election of Pope Gregory X lasted from 1268 to 1271, according to the portal.

Forty-two percent of U.S. Catholics said they wanted whomever is elected to carry on the teachings of Pope Francis, according to a new CBS News/YouGov poll. The survey of 1,298 U.S. Catholics was taken April 30-May 5 and has a margin of error of 3.8 points.

Thirty-seven percent of respondents said they wanted the next pope to have more conservative teachings, while 21% said they wanted to see more progressive teachings, according to the poll.

The pope, who died April 21 at age 88, was highly favored among both Catholics and non-Catholics in the U.S., McClatchy News reported.

Experts believe Francis’ emphasis on social justice, the environment and interfaith relations as well as his humble beginnings contributed to his popularity.

According to the poll, 76% of Catholics said they approved of the direction in which Pope Francis led the church, including 35% of respondents who said they strongly approved. Twenty-four percent of Catholics said they disapproved, per the poll.

How US Catholics are keeping up with papal conclave

Forty-one percent of U.S. Catholics said they were following the conclave “somewhat closely,” and 22% said they were following it “very closely,” according to the poll.

Thirty-seven percent of respondents said they were not following it very closely or at all, per the poll.

Although there has never been an American pope, several Catholics, 31%, said they think Francis’ successor should come from the U.S., the poll found.

Three American cardinals — Joseph Tobin, Timothy Dolan and Raymond Burke — are candidates who could earn support during the conclave, but experts think an American pope is unlikely this time around, Newsweek reported.

Pope Francis was popular in US with many groups, data shows. What won them over?

Originally published April 21, 2025 for the Miami Herald

Dubbed “the people’s pope,” Pope Francis — who died on Easter Monday at age 88 — was highly regarded by Catholics and non-Catholics alike, according to surveys.

His death was announced by the Vatican in the early hours of April 21 in a statement on X, formerly known as Twitter.

“He taught us to live the values of the Gospel with fidelity, courage, and universal love, especially in favor of the poorest and most marginalized,” said Cardinal Kevin Farrell, according to a separate statement on X.

With an unconventional ascent to the papacy and a more inclusive, progressive approach to leadership than his predecessor, according to experts, many were hopeful his election would bring people back to church. But while those hopes largely did not manifest, as church attendance in the U.S. dropped across most religious groups, according to a 2024 Gallup poll, Pope Francis did garner a rather high approval, especially among non-Catholic groups.

In the U.S., where about 20% of the population identifies as Catholic, 63% of adults said they have a “very” or “mostly” favorable view of Pope Francis, according to a 2021 Pew Research Center study.

Majorities of non-Catholics, including White Protestants who aren’t evangelical, Black Protestants, and people who said they don’t belong to any religion — also known in the study as religious “nones” — have favorable opinions of the Pope, per the same study. White evangelical protestants were divided, and data on Jewish and Muslim Americans was not included.

Ryan Burge, a leading researcher on American religious trends, told McClatchy News the approval rating among non-Catholics — specifically the religiously unaffiliated — is notable.

“There’s a lot of anti-religion amongst the nones,” he said. “Anytime you can see a religious figure scoring above 50% with non-religious people is a huge, huge deal.”

Burge compared the Pope’s ratings with how religious “nones” score evangelical leaders, with those numbers often being in the “20s and 30s,” he said.

“That’s significant in that the ‘nones’ don’t hate the Pope, which has not always been the case,” Burge said.

Why was Pope Francis so popular among non-Catholics?

There are multiple presumptions as to why Pope Francis was well liked by non-Catholics, including his humble beginnings, focus on social justice and the environment and emphasis on interfaith relations, experts said.

Francis’ less conservative stance on immigration, justice and economic issues may have helped the religious “nones” like him because these were slight changes in their direction, especially coming out of Pope Benedict’s tenure as he was seen as an “old school conservative,” according to Burge.

Being born in Argentina, Francis brought this idea that the Catholic Church is more than Europe, he added.

He often made headlines with his interfaith relationships, including his close friendship with Rabbi Abraham Skorka, said Amir Hussain, professor of theological studies at Loyola Marymount University who specializes in Islamic studies.

Hussain cited several actions the Pope took that appealed to non-Catholics, including an instance in which he washed the feet of a Muslim woman in prison.

“I think that kind of stuff reaches out to people that this genuinely is a person who cares about and is concerned with people,” he said.

Even the name he took — after St. Francis of Assisi who in 1219 met with Sultan Al-Malik al-Kamil, a Muslim leader, to foster interfaith dialogue during the Fifth Crusade — was significant, Hussain said.

“I think right from the beginning that name that he takes, if you’re a Muslim who knows your history, you think, OK, this is interesting,” he said.

Julie Byrne, Catholic studies chair at Hofstra University, agreed that Francis’ openness helped him become popular among people of different faiths.

“The Catholic Church has, at some points, seemed under recent papacies to be more insular and more interested in policing its boundaries and more interested in advocacy for Catholics only,” she said, adding that Francis helped people of other faiths feel advocated for.

With respect to religious “nones,” Byrne said Francis’ seemingly looser boundaries helped him connect with people who were not necessarily interested in religion but interested in making the world a more “peaceable place.”

“He does have a spiritual but not religious vibe,” she said. “He was someone who, in his approach to Catholicism, always emphasized the spirit of the law over the letter of the law.”

Favorability among U.S. Catholics

Pope Francis was “broadly popular” among U.S. Catholics throughout his papacy, according to data from 15 Pew Research Center surveys taken since 2013. His most recent favorability rating was 78% of Catholics viewing him positively, according to a February survey.

“Over the last seven years, U.S. Catholics have been more divided by party in their views of the pontiff than was the case earlier in his tenure,” researchers said in the poll.

While 88% of U.S. Catholics who are Democrats held a positive view of him in February, 69% of Republicans expressed a similar view, per the poll.

The survey also found that Catholics’ views of the Pope didn’t deviate much based on gender, race or ethnicity, age, or frequency of church attendance.

Byrne said while the next few weeks will include an outpouring of love for the late Pope, it’s important to also reflect on instances in which some say he may have missed the mark.

“(Pope Francis) said himself that he was not perfect, and always asked people to pray for him as he was praying for them,” she said. “And so it is in keeping with his own humility about himself, just to say that he could have done things better on some fronts.”

Does Trump’s anti-Christian bias executive order favor one religion? What experts say

President Trump announced plans to rid the U.S. of “anti-Christian bias” and establish a White House Faith Office. Screengrab from The White House's Facebook video.

Originally published February 10, 2025 for the Miami Herald

President Donald Trump’s executive order promising to “end the anti-Christian weaponization of government” raised questions for some about what it means for the First Amendment right of religious freedom.

The order, issued Thursday, Feb. 6, puts in place a task force — led by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi — to investigate policies that the administration said target Christians. The next day, Trump signed another order establishing a White House Faith Office to “protect religious liberty.”

In the first few weeks of his second term, Trump and his administration’s polices have prompted legal challenges, and some have called into question if the administration’s actions are on par with the rule of law. For some Americans, some new executive orders amplify tensions over the constitutional separation of church and state.

“The government’s job is to protect everyone’s rights, not give special treatment to one religion. Will this office defend non-Christians and the nonreligious, or just push a Christian nationalist agenda?” The Freedom From Religion Foundation, a nonprofit working for the separation of church and state, said in a Feb. 7 statement on X, formerly known as Twitter.

What do experts say?

Rick Garnett, director of Notre Dame’s program on Church, State & Society, told McClatchy News he thinks the executive order to eradicate anti-Christian bias is “appropriate” as a response to reports of the FBI targeting some conservative Catholic groups.

The order cites a retracted 2023 FBI memorandum that suggested infiltrating Catholic churches as “threat mitigation,” among other examples of what the Trump administration sees as anti-Christian bias.

“It is not unconstitutional for an agency or administration to identify a particular problem, and to respond to that particular problem. For example, it was common, after 9/11, for agencies to take particular steps to safeguard against anti-Muslim bias,” Garnett said in an email.

Caroline Corbin, professor at the University of Miami School of Law, agreed that narrowing in on one religion is not necessarily considered favoring one over another. However, she said bigger context surrounding this executive order makes it a little more complex.

“Christians are not, in fact, discriminated against and persecuted in the United States,” Corbin told McClatchy News. “So there doesn’t really seem to be a need to focus on discrimination against Christians.”

As this directive is set forth, other actions targeting groups for erasure are also happening, Corbin said, adding that she thinks the Trump administration wants to deny discrimination against non-Christian groups.

The Trump administration has signed executive orders restricting transgender rights and ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in the federal workforce.

Corbin said the preference for Christianity seen in this context does raise constitutional problems about favoring one religion over another.

Charles Haynes, founder of the Freedom Forum’s Religious Freedom Center, told McClatchy News that it seems like a range of issues surrounding abortion, LGBTQ rights and religious liberty are seen by the Trump administration as anti-Christian bias.

“It’s little ironic to think that the people who are in the majority — and many places in the country, many states who have great political power — are claiming to be under attack, but from their perspective, the government went off the rails ... and disfavored them because they don’t like their views on the social issues,” Haynes said.

He said that in choosing to focus on anti-Christian bias rather than another religion or non-religion, Trump is fulfilling his campaign promises to a constituency made up of mostly conservative Christians.

Haynes said that while he thinks it’s clear Trump is favoring one religion over another, it doesn’t go as far as to become unconstitutional.

“It would have to be more — have to be government action that somehow favors conservative Christian groups over other religious groups,” Haynes said. “This could be seen more as an effort to fight a societal problem, so the government can do that.”

What do some evangelical Christians think?

According to data from the Survey Center on American Life, a growing number of white evangelical Christians do think Christianity is under attack.

In 2009, a majority of white evangelicals disagreed that evangelical Christians faced a lot of discrimination in the U.S. In 2023, however, the numbers flipped, and this notion became generally accepted, with 60% of white evangelicals believing evangelical Christians are regularly discriminated against.

“Anti-Christian bias is very real in the U.S. Hostility towards Bible believing followers of Jesus is growing,” Jack Graham, pastor at Prestonwood Baptist Church in Texas, said in a Feb. 7 statement on X. “I am grateful for President Trumps order for protection under the law.”

Teacher suspended over crucifix that hung by desk for 10 years, Connecticut suit says

A crucifix, approximately 12-inches tall hangs on a wall adjacent to Castro’s desk, along with children’s art and a calendar. According to a lawsuit, Castro was asked to move the crucifix to a spot underneath her desk by school officials. First Liberty Institute

Originally published February 7, 2025 for the Miami Herald

A Connecticut teacher is being reprimanded by school officials for refusing to take down a crucifix, which she said has brought her “peace and strength” over the last decade she’s had it displayed in her classroom, according to a lawsuit.

The complaint — filed Jan. 30 by Marisol Arroyo-Castro, who’s been an educator for 32 years and currently teaches seventh grade at DiLoreto Elementary & Middle School — accuses administrators at the Consolidated School District of New Britain of violating her rights to “free speech and religious free exercise.”

According to Castro’s attorneys, school officials have and “continue to punish (her) for engaging in private, non-coercive expression — specifically, hanging a crucifix among other personal items on the wall next to her desk — solely because her expression is religious and takes place on school property.”

In December, school officials asked Castro to move the approximately 12-inch crucifix after receiving complaints from parents and students about the culture of her classroom — including some students who said the crucifix and religious language Castro uses makes them feel uncomfortable, a spokesperson for the school district told McClatchy News.

“Every decision by the Consolidated School District of New Britain has been made in accordance with the law and in collaboration with our legal counsel,” Superintendent Tony Gasper said in a statement shared with McClatchy News. “This teacher has been offered various options to resolve this matter, all of which she has declined, therefore we look forward to resolving this matter in the court of law.”

The Connecticut case is the latest in a string of federal cases highlighting the ongoing debate of what it means to practice personal freedoms while retaining constitutional separation of church and state.

In the 2022 case Carson v. Makin, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states can not choose to subsidize some private schools and not others based on religion. That same year, in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, the Supreme Court ruled that a coach’s discipline for praying with students breached his First Amendment rights to free exercise and speech.

Crucifix controversy

For Castro, the crucifix is “part of her personal and religious identity,” and occasionally, she will stay at her desk during her lunch break to look at it and pray, according to the complaint.

Although other teachers at the school have personal items referencing religion on display — including a coffee mug with a biblical reference, a photo of the Virgin Mary and a Santa Claus — Castro is the only one who was asked to move hers, attorneys said.

According to administration notes shared with McClatchy News, Castro was called in to discuss removing the crucifix Dec. 6 after students had previously complained about it and other religious language she used in her classroom. She was instructed to take down the cross by the next Monday.

When school officials saw she had not complied, she was called into another meeting Dec. 10, when she agreed to move the crucifix to the underside of her desk, according to the notes.

But by moving the crucifix under her desk, as instructed, Castro became emotional, feeling as if it was “an affront to her faith,” attorneys said. The teacher then changed her mind and put it back in the original spot. After telling school officials of her decision to keep it up, she received a formal letter of reprimand asking her to move the crucifix and to “remain neutral when speaking of religion,” according to the Dec. 11 letter shared with McClatchy News.

“When a public school employee hangs a religious artifact in their classroom, it sends the message that the school district (which is an arm of the government) is promoting that religion, so putting that religious artifact on the wall of the school building is not legally permissible,” school officials said in the letter.

After still refusing to move the crucifix, Castro was placed on unpaid suspension for two days starting Dec. 12.

Then, Castro emailed school officials saying she could not return to school “in good conscience” if she was required to “hide” the crucifix, attorneys said.

“The crucifix that I hang by my desk does not violate the Establishment Clause. In fact, it is protected by my free exercise and free speech rights,” Castro wrote in the Dec. 16 email.

On that day, Castro was placed on paid administrative leave, according to a letter shared with McClatchy News. “The cross issue and student and teacher complaint are the reason she was put on paid administrative leave,” the district spokesperson told McClatchy News in a Feb. 5 email.

However, Castro’s attorneys told McClatchy News in a Feb. 6 statement that the school district did not bring up other accusations aside from the refusal to take down the crucifix until after she spoke up about her rights.

“We are disappointed that the district is trying to distract from their unconstitutional religious discrimination by smearing this veteran teacher,” Keisha Toni Russell, senior counsel at First Liberty Institute said in the email. “The bottom line is that school officials put Marisol on paid leave because she refused their directive to take down her crucifix.”

The complaint asks for equitable relief from suspending, assigning or disciplining Castro for hanging the crucifix, for her to be fully reinstated without conditions regarding the crucifix and to expunge all disciplinary records concerning the refusal to remove the crucifix.

New Britain is about a 10-mile drive southwest from Hartford.

Trump immigration order ‘invades our sacred space,’ Quaker groups say in lawsuit

Originally published January 28, 2025 for the Miami Herald

Nearly 400 years after members of the Religious Society of Friends, also known as Quakers, arrived in America in pursuit of religious freedom, a new immigration policy threatens the ability of the religious group to freely practice their beliefs, according to a lawsuit.

Five Quaker groups — including the first formal association of Quakers in the world — filed a lawsuit Jan. 27 against the Department of Homeland Security over a new Trump administration policy rescinding a previous guideline in which immigration officials could not enforce actions in “sensitive” locations, such as schools and places of worship.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement made 956 arrests Jan. 26, according to a Facebook post by the agency.

“A week ago today, President Trump swore an oath to defend the Constitution and yet today religious institutions that have existed since the 1600s in our country are having to go to court to challenge what is a violation of every individual’s Constitutional right to worship,” Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward, the organization representing the Quaker groups, said in a Jan. 27 news release.

Several religious leaders have spoken out against the new policy, and while other nonprofit organizations — some stemming from religious groups — have filed similar lawsuits on account of the new policy, this is the first lawsuit filed directly from a faith-based organization.

A DHS spokesperson told McClatchy News in a Jan. 27 email the agency does not comment on pending litigation.

The lawsuit

The 40-page lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, argues that the new immigration order violates fundamentals of the Quaker religious experience, including communal worship.

“For (Quaker congregations) communal worship is not just important, it is the very process of worship itself,” prosecutors said.

In Quaker worship, people sit together in silence and wait to hear from God. Then, anyone attending worship is encouraged to stand and share that message, according to the complaint.

“Quakers believe that those with varied life experiences — including immigrants — can provide unique messages from God. Being able to receive those messages is fundamental to the Quaker religious exercise,” prosecutors said.

The new policy has instilled fear in migrant-friendly congregations and led to the cancellation of some worship services, according to the complaint.

“Our faith requires us to do justice, oppose war and violence, love our neighbors (with no exceptions) and to make decisions with everyone in the room,” the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, one of the Quaker groups represented in the lawsuit, said in the release. “ ... The DHS policy impedes all of these things and invades our sacred space and ability to worship freely.”

The Quaker groups want any policy permitting immigration-enforcement at or near houses of worship to be declared unconstitutional, according to the lawsuit.

Quakers and social justice

Quakers have a long history of involvement in human rights and social justice causes.

They have been involved in advocating for the protection of Native Americans’ rights, were early abolitionists and had many leaders involved in the women’s suffrage movement, according to History.com

The Catholic voting gap was the largest in decades, polls show. Whom did they choose?

Originally published November 6, 2024 for the Miami Herald

As ballots were counted late into the evening on Tuesday, Nov. 5, U.S. Catholics — a group experts see as “sharply divided by party” — broke for former President Donald Trump by a historically large margin nationwide, exit polls revealed.

Fifty-eight percent of U.S. Catholics favored Trump, compared to 40% who supported Vice President Kamala Harris, according to exit polls from NBC News, The Washington Post and CNN. The 18-point margin represents the largest voting gap among the group in decades.

According to the NBC News poll of key states, the divide was even more pronounced among white Catholics, who favored Trump 60% compared to 37% for Harris. In the 2020 election, 57% supported President Joe Biden, compared to 42% for Trump, according to a 2024 Pew Research Center study.

However, a majority of Catholic voters overall voted for Biden in the 2020 election, according to Gallup.

Margaret Thompson, associate professor of history and political science at Syracuse University, told McClatchy News although the religious group still tends to mirror the general public, it has changed a lot over the past two decades, growing smaller and more ethnically diverse.

She said what shocked her was that the gap among Catholics was so much bigger than the general public.

“One thing we do know is that the Latino vote broke for Trump to a much greater extent than it has for any Republican,” she said. “So the question is, does that add significantly to the Catholic margin?”

Cristina Traina, professor of Christian theology and ethics at Fordham University, told McClatchy News in a phone interview that experts used to be able to assume how the majority of Catholics would vote.

“You could pretty much assume that 80% to 90% of Catholics were going to vote a particular way because of their Catholic identity and the priorities that the Catholic church and they as Catholics had,” Traina said. “That’s no longer true. Catholics are across the spectrum.”

According to the exit polls, Trump outperformed earlier predictions of how the religious group would vote. A Pew Research Center study published two months before Election Day found Trump leading Harris by just five percentage points among the group.

“It is surprising to me, especially given that apparently 61% of Catholics would like abortion to be legal in many, if not all cases,” Traina said. “Clearly there’s not an abortion motivation to vote for Trump this year.”

What issues were most important to US Catholics?

Traina said she thinks several people who were on the fence about their vote broke for Trump because of greater confidence in him on issues such as immigration and the economy — mirroring top issues for voters nationally, according to an AP VoteCast survey.

“Catholics are pretty reflective of society at large and of their demographic groups,” Traina said.

The survey also found that Catholics picked Trump as a better fit to handle all issues except abortion and climate change.

How did other religious groups vote?

The NBC News exit poll found that 72% of Protestants — the largest of the religious groups — voted for Trump, compared to 26% for Harris.

However, a majority of Jewish voters, “nones” — people who identify as atheists, agnostics or “nothing in particular” — and others all voted for Harris, according to the poll.

Does theology impact Black churches’ involvement in elections? What experts say

Originally published October 14, 2024 for the Miami Herald

For many who grew up in predominantly Black church congregations, the importance of public involvement was intertwined with historical and theological teachings.

“Part of the importance to me about civic engagement was absolutely passed down as a young person,” said Valerie Cooper, associate professor of Black church studies at Duke Divinity School. “As a person growing up in a Black church, it was impossible to miss.”

According to research published Oct. 7 by the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University, Black churches are more likely than all other Christian churches to participate in election-related activities, but some experts are concerned the church’s efforts won’t have as much influence as previous years, citing a decline in church attendance.

A 2021 Pew Research Center study found that young Black adults are less likely to attend predominantly Black congregations, and 46% of Black adults in Generation Z say they “seldom or never” attend church.

“Increasingly our young people have no experience with church and don’t have those same sorts of cultural ties,” Cooper told McClatchy News.

She remembers hearing adults in her congregation discussing candidates during the coffee hour or after service, she said, adding that through her church community she understood the sacrifice Black people made to be able to vote.

Black theology emphasizes God as liberator, Cooper said. Historically, enslaved African Americans believed God would deliver them from slavery in the same way God delivered the Israelites in the book of Exodus, she said.

“It was part of our not only theology, but part of our communal salvation story: that God delivered us from slavery and the gift of that deliverance is the right to participate in the civic life of the nation,” Cooper said.

Jennifer Leath, associate professor of Black religions at Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada, told McClatchy News a politically engaged faith tradition is familiar to her through involvement in the African Methodist Episcopal Church.

She said Matthew 25 — a parable about looking after strangers in need — is one that her community remembers and refers to when thinking about community engagement.

It all goes back to a theology of liberation and the belief that followers should fight for freedom and justice for all people, Leath said.

“For Black churches — and I think Black people and communities — our faith is not in politics. Our hope, our trust is in God, and specifically, the God who makes us free,” Leath said. “As simple as that is, it’s also complex because we don’t all perceive freedom in the same way, nor do we fight for it the same way.”

How have Black churches voted in the past?

Traditionally, experts have viewed Black churches as a reliable voting bloc for Democratic candidates.

Jason Shelton, professor of sociology and director of the Center for African American Studies at the University of Texas at Arlington, noted in an article published by the Brookings Institution, “nearly 70% of African Americans across most religious classifications align themselves with the Democratic party.”

In 2008, when former President Barack Obama ran for president, many Black pastors and congregations united to support him, the Chicago Tribune reported. According to a 2017 Pew Research Center report, 66.6% of eligible Black voters turned out to the polls for Obama’s re-election — one percentage point higher than white voter turnout that year and the highest percentage of Black voter turnout ever.

However, African American political alignments have changed as their religious affiliations have changed, Shelton said.

“Recent GSS data shows that there has been a double-digit decline — by as much as 43% — in the percentage of self-described political ‘liberals’ among Baptists, Holiness/Pentecostals, nondenoms, and religious nonaffiliates,” he said.

How other churches participate in election-related activity

The election-related activity with the highest participation across all Christian churches is sermons about what the Bible teaches on specific issues, with 61% of Christians who attend church regularly saying their church did this, the Arizona Christian University study found.

Encouraging people to vote — without endorsing a specific candidate — was second-highest, with 56% of respondents saying their church did this.

Inviting candidates to speak at church, registering new voters, endorsing specific candidates and providing voter’s guides were among the less common election activities churches engage in, with a majority of respondents saying their churches did not do any of these, according to the survey.

The survey, conducted Aug. 26 through Sept. 6, interviewed 2,000 self-identified Christian adults who regularly attend a Christian church.