糖心Vlog

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. 鈥� In a victory for religious freedom and church-state separation, a federal district court issued a preliminary injunction today in Stinson v. Fayetteville School District No. 1, prohibiting the school district defendants from implementing an Arkansas law that requires all public schools to permanently display a government-chosen, Protestant version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom and library. In his decision U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Brooks held that Arkansas Act 573, which is due to take effect on Aug. 5, 鈥渋s plainly unconstitutional鈥� under both the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment. Ruling that the law would lead to unconstitutional religious coercion of the child plaintiffs and interfere with their parents鈥� rights to direct their children鈥檚 religious education, Judge Brooks explained: 鈥淪tudents receiving instruction in algebra, physics, engineering, accounting, computer science, woodworking, fashion design, and German will do so in classrooms that prominently display (the King James version of) the Ten Commandments. Every day from kindergarten to twelfth grade, children will be confronted with these Commandments鈥攐r face civil penalties for missing school.鈥� Today鈥檚 decision also sounds the alarm against growing state efforts to 鈥渆xperiment鈥� with government establishments of religion: 鈥淲hy would Arkansas pass an obviously unconstitutional law? Most likely because the State is part of a coordinated strategy among several states to inject Christian religious doctrine into public-school classrooms.鈥� 鈥淎ct 573 is a direct infringement of our religious-freedom rights, and we鈥檙e pleased that the court ruled in our favor,鈥� said Samantha Stinson, who is a plaintiff in the case along with her husband, Jonathan Stinson. 鈥淭he version of the Ten Commandments mandated by Act 573 conflicts with our family鈥檚 Jewish tenets and practice, and our belief that our children should receive their religious instruction at home and within our faith community, not from government officials.鈥� 鈥淧ublic schools are not Sunday schools,鈥� said Heather L. Weaver, senior counsel for the ACLU鈥檚 Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. 鈥淭oday鈥檚 decision ensures that our clients鈥� classrooms will remain spaces where all students, regardless of their faith, feel welcomed and can learn without worrying that they do not live up to the state鈥檚 preferred religious beliefs.鈥� 鈥淭oday鈥檚 ruling is a victory for Arkansas families and for the First Amendment,鈥� said John Williams, legal director for the 糖心Vlogof Arkansas. 鈥淭he court saw through this attempt to impose religious doctrine in public schools and upheld every student鈥檚 right to learn free from government-imposed faith. We鈥檙e proud to stand with our clients 鈥� families of many different backgrounds 鈥� who simply want their kids to get an education.鈥� 鈥淭oday鈥檚 decision will ensure that Arkansas families 鈥� not politicians or public-school officials 鈥� get to decide how and when their children engage with religion,鈥� said Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. 鈥淚t sends a strong message across the country that the government respects the religious freedom of every student in our public schools.鈥� 鈥淲e are delighted that reason and our secular Constitution have prevailed, and that children will be spared this unconstitutional proselytizing,鈥� said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. 鈥淥ur public schools exist to educate, not to evangelize a captive audience.鈥� 鈥淲e are heartened by today鈥檚 well-reasoned decision that underscores a foundational principle of our nation: the government cannot impose religious doctrine,鈥� said Jon Youngwood, Co-Chair of Simpson Thacher鈥檚 Litigation Department. 鈥淭his ruling is critical to protecting the First Amendment rights of students and families to make their own decisions as to whether and how they engage with religion.鈥� The preliminary injunction, issued by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, prohibits the school-district defendants, including Fayetteville School District No. 1, Springdale School District No. 50, Bentonville School District No. 6, and Siloam Springs School Dist. No. 21, from 鈥渃omplying with Act 573 of 2025 by displaying the Ten Commandments in public elementary- and secondary-school classrooms and libraries.鈥� Represented by the 糖心Vlog of Arkansas, the ACLU, 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 plaintiffs in Stinson v. Fayetteville School District No. 1 are a group of seven multifaith and nonreligious Arkansas families with children in public schools. A copy of the preliminary injunction can be found here: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2025/08/Stinson-Ruling.pdf

JEFFERSON COUNTY, Ill. 鈥� Following Jefferson County鈥檚 removal of a large Ten Commandments monument from the lawn of the county courthouse, the plaintiffs have withdrawn a lawsuit challenging the display. Represented by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, the 糖心Vlogof Illinois and the 糖心Vlog, a group of religious and nonreligious Jefferson County, Illinois, residents filed suit last month in state court, alleging that the religious monument violated Illinois鈥檚 constitutional protections for the separation of church and state. During a meeting in late June, immediately after the lawsuit was filed, members of the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners voted to remove the Ten Commandments monument from county property. Earlier this month, the monument was relocated to a more appropriate location, the West Salem Trinity Church in Mount Vernon. In yesterday鈥檚 joint motion to dismiss, the county affirmed that 鈥渢he monument will not return to county property.鈥� Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU鈥檚 Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, applauded the county鈥檚 decision: 鈥淭his is a victory for religious freedom. Although county officials had no business prominently displaying biblical scripture at the seat of local government, we鈥檙e glad that they鈥檝e now fixed their constitutional error.鈥� Kevin Fee, legal director for the 糖心Vlogof Illinois, noted the role that local residents played in the victory: 鈥淥ur clients showed great courage in coming together and challenging this illegal action by their local elected officials. It is easy to be silent and not speak up. But these brave residents stood up for constitutional values and demanded change.鈥� 鈥淲e鈥檙e happy that the county eventually complied with Illinois鈥� church-state guarantees,鈥� says Hirsh M. Joshi, Patrick O鈥橰eiley Legal Fellow at the Freedom From Religion Foundation. 鈥淚t was an honor to help my fellow Illinoisans keep their local government secular.鈥� 鈥淲e鈥檙e delighted that after we sued, the county acted with alacrity to remove these biblical edicts from the seat of county government,鈥� adds FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. 鈥淭his action shows that Jefferson County understands it has no right to tell residents which gods to worship, how many gods to worship or whether to worship any gods at all.鈥�

On March 5, 2025, the 糖心Vlogand its allies filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that the First Amendment does not prohibit states from offering limited, categorical religious exemptions or from distinguishing between religious and nonreligious entities and activities in assessing the applicability of exemptions.