Email | American Center for Law and Justice




[link removed]

John,

402,000 abortions a year and nearly $800 million of our tax dollars: That was the taxpayer cost of Planned Parenthood just last year alone.

Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" defunded Planned Parenthood, and the abortion giant rushed to court. It knows its business model of killing babies for profit is in trouble, and its days are numbered without taxpayer dollars. Its affiliates are already laying off abortionists.

[link removed]
Sign Our Petition Now

We filed an amicus brief that was consequential in temporarily BLOCKING Planned Parenthood's funding. But TODAY, we file a monumental brief on the constitutional arguments for DEFUNDING Planned Parenthood – PERMANENTLY. We need your prayers.

This is our biggest amicus filing since the overturning of Roe v. Wade. We are boldly fighting for the unborn – now filing 5 amicus briefs to defund the abortion industry, and our team is already preparing briefs for the Supreme Court.

Planned Parenthood is on the ropes, but it won't go down without a fight. Hundreds of thousands of babies' lives depend on what we do TODAY.

Planned Parenthood is pouring taxpayer money, lawyers, and lies into its fight to continue killing babies. We cannot outspend them, but together we can beat them. Take action with us.

[link removed]
Sign Petition: Defund Planned Parenthood NOW.


Jordan Sekulow

ACLJ Executive Director



[link removed]
Chip in $5

[link removed]

Share on Facebook



To ensure that you continue to receive emails from the ACLJ,
please add [email protected] to your contacts.



The ACLJ is an organization dedicated to the defense of constitutional liberties secured by law.

American Center for Law and Justice is a d/b/a for Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism, Inc., a tax-exempt, not-for-profit, religious corporation as defined under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, specifically dedicated to the ideal that religious freedom and freedom of speech are inalienable, God-given rights. The Center's purpose is to engage legal, legislative and cultural issues by implementing an effective strategy of advocacy, education and litigation to ensure that those rights are protected under the law. The organization has participated in numerous cases before the Supreme Court, Federal Court of Appeals, Federal District Courts, and various state courts regarding freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Your gift is very much appreciated and fully deductible
as a charitable contribution. A copy of our latest financial report may be obtained by writing to us at P.O. Box 90555, Washington, DC 20090-0555.


Tune in to our daily broadcast, "Sekulow," live each weekday at noon ET on over 1,000 radio stations and SiriusXM, with live video streams on Facebook, YouTube, Rumble, X, and ACLJ.org.


Do not send a response message to this email for any reason. Visit
[link removed]
ACLJ.org/help to submit a legal help request. All legal requests submitted by email cannot be answered.


HOW CAN I SUPPORT THE AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE?

[link removed]
Make a secure online donation .


Copyright (c) 2025, ACLJ |
[link removed]
Privacy & Security Policy |
[link removed]
Unsubscribe
To view the email as a web page click
[link removed]
here .



Thank you for taking the time to read this email. This message is part of an ongoing conversation between us, and I want to take a moment to ensure you have full transparency about why you received this message, how your information is handled, and what to expect from future emails.

About the American Center for Law and Justice

Founded in 1990 with the mandate to protect religious and constitutional freedoms, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) engages legal, legislative, and cultural issues by implementing an effective strategy of advocacy, education, and litigation that includes representing clients before the Supreme Court of the United States and international tribunals around the globe.

As ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow continued to build his legal and legislative team, the ACLJ experienced tremendous success in litigating cases at all levels of the judiciary – from the federal district court level to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Over the last two decades, Sekulow has appeared before the Supreme Court of the United States on numerous occasions, successfully arguing precedent-setting cases before the high Court: Protecting the free speech rights of pro-life demonstrators; safeguarding the constitutional rights of religious groups to have equal access to public facilities; ensuring that public school students could form and participate in religious organizations, including Bible clubs, on campus; and guaranteeing that minors could participate in the political process by protecting their free speech rights in the political setting.

Headquartered in Washington, D.C., the ACLJ's work reaches across the globe with affiliated offices in Israel, France, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe. In addition to its religious liberties work, the ACLJ also focuses on constitutional law involving the issues of national security, human life, judicial nominations, and protecting patriotic expression such as our National Motto and the Pledge of Allegiance.

Why You're Receiving This Email

You're receiving this email because at some point, you opted in to receive updates, news, or information on a specific topic we've previously discussed or shared. Whether it was through a subscription, a form submission, or another form of communication, your information was shared willingly, and we respect your decision to connect with us.

If you're wondering about the nature of our correspondence, rest assured that we aim to keep all emails relevant, timely, and free from unnecessary clutter. This includes respecting your inbox and refraining from sending irrelevant messages.

A Commitment to Non-Intrusive Emails

We aim to create a non-intrusive communication experience. This means we won't overwhelm your inbox with excessive messages, and we work hard to ensure our content remains clear and concise. The purpose of this email is to stay connected with you and provide updates or information that we believe is meaningful. If we ever fail to meet these standards, we encourage you to let us know.

Feedback, whether positive or constructive, is always appreciated. Your thoughts help us understand how we can do better and improve our communication approach. While we cannot promise every suggestion will be implemented, we will take the time to carefully review and consider your input.

Accessibility and Communication

If you have any trouble accessing the unsubscribe page, managing preferences, or understanding why you're receiving this email, you can reach out directly to our support team. We aim to provide a response within a reasonable time frame and address your concerns effectively.

Our communication is designed to be as inclusive as possible, but we know there's always room for improvement. If you have any feedback on how we can make our emails more accessible or relevant, please don't hesitate to share.

Your Privacy is Important

We value your trust and take your privacy very seriously. The information you provide is securely stored and only used responsibly. If you ever want to review how we handle your data, contact us directly. Transparency is our priority, and we're happy to address any questions you might have.

You are always in control of the information you share. If you feel that any part of your subscription or interaction needs clarification, let us know. We're here to provide accurate answers and ensure your satisfaction.

How to Unsubscribe or Manage Your Preferences

We understand that everyone's inbox is different. If you ever find our emails no longer relevant, there's no hard feelings. You can easily manage your email preferences or unsubscribe using the link provided below.

By clicking the unsubscribe link, you'll be taken to a page where you can either adjust your communication preferences (such as receiving fewer emails or only on specific topics) or completely remove yourself from our list. The process is straightforward, and any changes will take effect promptly.

We don't use tricks or gimmicks to keep you subscribed. Our priority is to ensure that our emails add value to your day, and if they don't, we respect your decision to part ways.

Legal Information

We comply with all applicable laws and regulations regarding email communication. This includes adhering to laws and maintaining the highest standards for consent-based communication. Your trust matters, and we work diligently to ensure every email you receive meets these requirements.

If you need further clarification on our compliance policies or legal obligations, please ask. Transparency and accountability are central to our communication strategy, and we're happy to provide additional details if needed.

Contact Information

We strive to ensure all communication channels are open and readily available to you. Whether it's a question, comment, or concern, our team is ready to assist.

A Final Note

Emails are one of the many ways we stay connected, but we understand they aren't perfect for everyone. If there's another way you'd prefer to communicate or stay updated, let us know. Whether it's through social media, a direct call, or another channel, we're open to finding the most effective way to share information with you.

We want to emphasize that our goal is never to disrupt or clutter your inbox. Every email sent is intended to provide value, and we genuinely appreciate your time and attention. Thank you for allowing us to stay in touch with you.

This footer was designed to ensure transparency, provide essential information, and give you full control over your communication preferences. We hope it meets your expectations, but if there's anything you'd like to see improved, we're always here to listen.

Your interaction with our content, in any format, is appreciated. We value your time and the trust you place in our communications. Thank you for being an active member of our community, and we look forward to continued exchanges in the future. If you have missed our previous HTML emails, here is our privacy policy:

This message is for those reading in plain text, which may indicate use of an older device. We want to share general information about how we manage privacy and data.

We regularly review our systems and follow best practices to help protect your information.

If you notice anything unusual in your account, it may be helpful to review your settings.

Please note, we do not ask for personal payment information by email.

You can enable extra sign-in protection and use strong security to help keep your account safe.

Our privacy policy describes how ACLJ collects, uses, and protects your information.

By accessing or using the ACLJ Web Site, you agree to the terms of the ACLJ Web Site Online Privacy Policy, as outlined below. If you do not agree to these terms, please do not access or use this site. The ACLJ Web Site reserves the right to change the Online Privacy Policy from time to time at its sole discretion. Your use of this site will be subject to the most current version of the Online Privacy Policy at the time of such use.

Collection of Personal Information

When you engage in certain activities on this site, such as ordering information, signing petitions, making donations, sending requests to the ACLJ, downloading forms, or requesting newsletter or email subscriptions etc., the ACLJ Web Site may ask you to provide certain information about yourself by filling out and submitting an online form. It is completely optional for you to engage in these activities. If you elect to engage in these activities, however, the ACLJ Web Site may ask that you provide us personal information, such as your first and last name, mailing address (including zip code), E-mail address, employer, job title and department, telephone and facsimile numbers, and other personal identifying information. If you do not provide the requested data with respect to a
particular activity, you will not be able to engage in that activity.

How Your Personal Information is Used

The ACLJ Web Site collects your information in order to record and support your participation in the activities you select. For example, if you participate in petition drives or request assistance from the ACLJ, your information is used to contact you and send appropriate materials.

Use of Personal Information

The ACLJ Web Site recognizes and appreciates the importance of responsible use of information collected on this site. For this reason, the ACLJ reserves the option of contacting you at least one time about important issues in which the ACLJ is involved. At that time, and with each subsequent email or SMS message, the ACLJ will provide you with the opportunity to "opt out" using our automated system. If you choose this option, you will receive no further email or SMS (respectively) from the ACLJ.

Protection of Your Personal Information

The personal information that you provide in connection with making a donation to the ACLJ using the ACLJ Web Site, classifies your data as Donor Registration Information. Donor Registration Information is protected in several ways. First, it resides on a secure server that only selected ACLJ Web Site personnel and its authorized users have access to via password. Second, the ACLJ Web Site encrypts your personal information and thereby prevents unauthorized parties from viewing it. Personal information that you provide when registering for a petition, or corresponding with the ACLJ, for example, also resides on a secure server and is only accessible via password, however it is not encrypted.

Use of Cookies

The ACLJ Web Site currently uses cookies to reduce loading time.

Use of SMS Opt-In

We will not share your opt-in to an SMS campaign with any third party for purposes unrelated to providing you with the services of that campaign. We may share your Personal Data, including your SMS opt-in or consent status, with third parties that help us provide our messaging services, including but not limited to platform providers, phone companies, and any other vendors who assist us in the delivery of text messages.

Updating Your Personal Information

You have the right to access and correct your personal information at any time. With respect to Donor or Registration Information, this may be accomplished by contacting us.

You may also access and correct your personal information and privacy preferences by writing or calling ACLJ Web Site at:

The ACLJ Web Site

P.O.Box 90555

Washington, DC 20090-0555

(757) 802-9160

Privacy Related Complaints

If you believe that the ACLJ Web Site has not complied with this Online Privacy Policy with respect to your personal information, you may write the ACLJ Web Site Privacy Officer at the address indicated above.

In your letter, please describe in as much detail as possible the ways in which you believe that the ACLJ has not complied with the Official Web Site Online Privacy Policy. We will investigate your complaint promptly.

Please note that if you provide ACLJ Web Site with inconsistent privacy preferences (for example, by indicating on one occasion that third parties may contact you with marketing offers and indicating on another occasion that they may not), ACLJ Web Site cannot guarantee that your most recent privacy preference will be honored.

Also, please note that ACLJ Web Site is not responsible for the content or privacy practices of non-ACLJ Web sites to which we may link.

We may update this privacy policy occasionally. Changes will be reflected on our privacy policy page linked in this email.

Thank you for your attention.

Best regards,

ACLJ

Here are several of the cases and victories we've been involved in:

Amicus Briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court

Over the last two decades, the ACLJ has appeared before the Supreme Court of the United States on numerous occasions, successfully arguing precedent-setting cases before the high Court: Protecting the free speech rights of pro-life demonstrators; safeguarding the constitutional rights of religious groups to have equal access to public facilities; ensuring that public school students could form and participate in religious organizations, including Bible clubs, on campus; and guaranteeing that minors could participate in the political process by protecting their free speech rights in the political setting. We also file critical amicus briefs in hundreds of Supreme Court cases to defend constitutional liberties secured by law.

Pro-Life Amicus Briefs

Amicus briefs are a powerful way the ACLJ supports pro-life cases. When not engaged as counsel for the client, the ACLJ can still present an argument to the court by submitting an amicus brief. By doing so, we ensure the court hears a thorough legal argument on the issue and sees the widespread support for the lives of the unborn backed by our petitions. Since Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade, the ACLJ has increased its briefs at both the state and federal levels, supporting states standing up for the lives of the unborn and combating those pushing extreme abortion laws.

Violate Your Faith Or Risk Being Fired

Ferrier v. DTE Gas Company

The ACLJ filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of an employee who was denied a religious accommodation from his employer to express his faith. This case is significant to religious freedom as it underscores the fundamental right of Christian individuals to live and work in accordance with their sincerely held beliefs without fear of discrimination or coercion. The ACLJ seeks to reinforce legal protections under the First Amendment and federal laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Bible Studies and Christian Decorations Banned in Senior Living Centers

Kidd v. Regency HOA

We're hearing from a growing number of clients who have been harassed or even banned from holding Bible studies at their senior living centers. It's an epidemic that is spreading nationwide, and we're fighting back. A growing number of these senior centers are claiming that federal law prohibits them from allowing Bible studies. The reality is that federal law and the Constitution protect Bible studies and religious decorations. Banning them is simply unlawful. We're fighting back, sending demand letters and are prepared to go to court to defend your right to pray, display Christian decorations, and hold Bible studies in senior community centers just like any other activity that is allowed.

ACLJ Sues HOA for Unlawfully Banning Religious Group From Use of Facilities in Violation of the Fair Housing Act

The ACLJ filed a federal lawsuit against a Northern Virginia homeowner association (HOA) and its managing agent after the association refused to rescind its discriminatory policy banning our client from using common facilities open to other resident groups.

As we've previously written:

Among the 30 clubs and groups who also use the space is our client, a homeowner in the community who leads the only religious club. The club began as a small Bible study in someone's home and, over the years, expanded into a formal HOA club offering various faith-based events using the clubhouse, including both men's and women's Bible studies.

A fellow resident allegedly complained about a women's Bible study announcement in the January 2025 community newsletter that simply mentioned that the women were studying Hebrews. Shortly thereafter and without warning, the HOA board unanimously passed the motion to shut down access to the clubhouse for any religious gatherings. In its communication to residents, the board explained they were responding to "numerous concerns" and emphasized that shared facilities "are for the enjoyment of all our residents." They proceeded to explain that while religious clubs could still exist, they would need to meet elsewhere – suggesting private homes as alternatives. There was no policy change for established nonreligious clubs', nor even nonresidents' use of the facilities.

The specific motion mentioned above was unanimously passed in February to:

"Deny use of the Clubhouse and Clubhouse campus to any Club, organization, or entity that is primarily religious, political, or faith based in purpose, nature and/or intent. The use of the clubhouse and clubhouse campus will also be denied (as determined by the BOD) to any other entity that is inherently divisive in purpose, nature and/or intent."

The ACLJ quickly sent a demand letter to the HOA's attorneys explaining how their policy violates the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Specifically, the FHA prohibits discrimination "in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of . . . religion." Courts have consistently held that FHA protections don't end once someone purchases their home. As noted in one court decision, these protections "do not evaporate once a person takes possession of [their] house, condominium, or apartment."

The Department of Justice, which enforces the FHA, has explicitly stated that no one may be "excluded from reserving a common room for a prayer meeting when the room may be reserved for various comparable secular uses." Yet this is precisely what is happening in this community.

The HOA responded to our letter, denying any wrongdoing and refusing to change their discriminatory policy. This left us with no choice but to file a federal lawsuit to protect our client's religious freedoms under the FHA.

Cases like these have significant implications beyond just one community, as we continue to see HOAs across the country trampling on the religious liberties of homeowners. We hope this case sets a precedent for HOAs nationwide to stop exercising their power at the expense of their residents' rights secured by law.

We encourage anyone experiencing similar discrimination from their HOA or landlord to contact us.

VICTORY: School Backs Down After Banning Christian Club

We are excited to share another important victory for religious liberty – this time in New Hampshire, where students were initially denied the ability to host a Christian club at their public school for several years.

When two students first approached school leadership about starting a Christian club, the principal refused, insisting that such a group would not be permitted. This unlawful discrimination continued for two years. That's when the students reached out to the ACLJ, and we stepped in to defend them and enforce the law.

Take action with us to defend Christians, like these students, from the ongoing war on our faith. Sign our petition today.

The Equal Access Act makes it clear: If a public secondary school allows any non-curricular student clubs, it cannot discriminate against a religious club.

More than thirty-five years ago, at the U.S. Supreme Court, the ACLJ argued for this very same issue in Board of Education v. Mergens. In that case, the Supreme Court overwhelmingly affirmed that schools cannot discriminate against students conducting a meeting based on the "religious, political, philosophical, or other content of the speech at such meetings" under the Equal Access Act. The Equal Access Act further protects students from the influence of school officials on the content of voluntary, student-initiated meetings. It requires that religious clubs receive the same treatment as all other non-curricular student groups. Schools cannot single out religious groups for special restrictions or content censorship.

After being told "no," the students didn't give up. They reached out for help, and our ACLJ team immediately stepped in to counsel the students. We provided clear precedent and legal authority – cases that show schools cannot block a Christian club while allowing other student clubs to meet.

Once faced with the truth, the school quickly reversed its decision. The students are now free to host their Christian club on the same terms as other groups. This is a major victory not only for these students, but for all students in the district who now know that their religious liberty is protected under the law.

This case is a reminder of why we fight. Time and again, schools and government officials attempt to sideline or silence people of faith. Sometimes it's intentional; other times it's due to a lack of understanding of the law. Either way, the result is the same: Students' constitutional rights are violated. That's why the ACLJ stands ready to defend those rights and ensure that students are never forced to choose between their faith and their freedom.

Victories like this send a powerful message: Religious expression does not stop at the schoolhouse gate. When students want to gather, pray, or meet around their shared faith, the law is on their side.

We must stand up for religious liberty, or we could lose everything we have secured over our more than 35-year history at the ACLJ. Allowing students to express their faith and host Christian clubs affects every Christian student across the country. If it can happen there, it can happen anywhere. And that's why we remain vigilant – because every win like this strengthens the foundation of freedom for the next student who faces opposition. Together, we are making sure the rights of students of faith are not only recognized but respected.

VICTORY: ACLJ's Defense of Georgia's Election Integrity Laws Vindicated as Federal Government Dismisses Lawsuit

In a resounding victory for constitutional government, election integrity, and the rule of law, the Trump Administration has dropped a meritless lawsuit against Georgia's election law.

Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the DOJ to dismiss its lawsuit over Georgia Senate Bill 202 (SB 202), acknowledging that the Biden Administration "falsely accused Georgia of intentionally suppressing Black voters' votes."

This complete vindication of Georgia's election integrity laws – and the dismissal of all federal claims challenging Georgia's election laws – represents a triumph for the constitutional principles the ACLJ has steadfastly defended since filing our amicus brief in this case on behalf of 57 Members of Congress.

Help us defend election integrity. Add your voice to the petition: Defend Election Integrity and the Constitution.

The Biden Administration's "Fabricated" Attack on Georgia Exposed

The Justice Department's own press release reveals the stunning truth: "The Biden administration fabricated an untrue narrative following the passage of Senate Bill 202 and sued the state of Georgia, claiming without evidence that SB 202 was an intentional scheme to 'depress the Black vote' and referring to the basic election legislation as 'Jim Crow 2.0.'"

This admission confirms what the ACLJ argued from the beginning – that this lawsuit was not about protecting voting rights, but about federal overreach designed to prevent states from implementing commonsense election security measures. The Biden DOJ weaponized federal litigation to attack a state for exercising its clear constitutional authority under the Elections Clause.

The results speak for themselves. Attorney General Bondi noted that "Black voter turnout actually increased under SB 202," completely contradicting the Biden Administration's unfounded allegations. The reality is that "SB 202's commonsense reforms – photo ID for all voting, strengthened absentee ballot procedures, and rapid reporting of results – spurred record voter turnout, including among black Georgians."

This outcome validates every argument the ACLJ made in our brief defending Georgia's constitutional authority to implement these reasonable, non-discriminatory election security measures. States have a substantial interest in preventing fraud and ensuring election integrity – and the evidence proves these laws accomplished exactly that.

Constitutional Principles Prevail Over Political Theater

The ACLJ's amicus brief highlighted the fundamental constitutional issue at stake: The Elections Clause gives state legislatures – not federal bureaucrats or activist judges – primary authority to regulate the "times, places, and manner" of elections. From the moment this lawsuit was filed, the ACLJ recognized it as an unconstitutional attack on state sovereignty and election integrity. Our amicus brief, on behalf of 57 Members of Congress and over 647,000 ACLJ supporters, made several key arguments that the case's dismissal validates:

State Constitutional Authority: We emphasized that the Elections Clause gives states broad authority to regulate elections, including implementing security measures to prevent fraud and ensure integrity. As we said when we filed our brief: "[O]ur brief emphasized that the lawsuit is not about the hotly debated question of what kinds of election regulations should be enacted, but rather who gets to make that decision. The Constitution clearly entrusts that decision to state legislatures, not federal bureaucrats."

Federal Court Overreach: We warned against federal courts usurping state legislative authority over election administration, noting that such judicial micromanagement "would flout the Constitution's express commitment of the task to the States."

Legitimate State Interests: We highlighted Georgia's compelling interests in election security, fraud prevention, and maintaining public confidence in election integrity – interests that the evidence now proves were well-founded.

Partisan vs. Racial Motives: We argued that partisan disagreement about election policies does not constitute racial discrimination, a principle the DOJ has now explicitly acknowledged.

A New Era of Respect for Constitutional Government

The DOJ's statement that it is "done with this disgrace" and committed to "dismantling weaponized litigation" signals a return to constitutional governance and respect for state authority. This represents a fundamental shift from the previous Administration's approach of using federal litigation as a political weapon against states exercising their constitutional powers.

As the DOJ noted, "Instead of wasting time on false, divisive lawsuits, the Department of Justice will continue to root out real discrimination, promote common-sense election safeguards, and ensure equality for every American."

The ACLJ's Continuing Mission

This victory in Georgia represents just one battle in the broader fight to preserve our federal system of government and to protect states' rights while implementing common-sense election security measures.

This Georgia victory builds on the ACLJ's extensive track record of defending election integrity laws. We've challenged unconstitutional changes to election procedures and defended states' rights to verify voter eligibility. We have been at the forefront of protecting the constitutional framework that governs our elections.

For example, in Beals v. Virginia Coalition for Immigration Rights, the ACLJ filed a crucial amicus brief defending Virginia's constitutional authority to remove non-citizens from its voter rolls. We argued that states have not only the right, but also the duty, to maintain accurate voter registration lists and ensure that only eligible citizens participate in elections. Our brief emphasized that the Constitution's Elections Clause gives states primary responsibility for election administration, including the verification of voter eligibility. This case demonstrates the same principles we defended in Georgia – that states must retain their constitutional authority to implement reasonable measures that protect election integrity and maintain public confidence in the electoral process. In
that case, the Supreme Court issued a resounding win for election integrity and the ability of states to protect their elections.

This dismissal is not just a victory for Georgia – it's a victory for every American who believes in constitutional government, election integrity, and the rule of law. The Biden Administration's "fabricated . . . narrative" has been exposed, and the principle that states have constitutional authority to secure their elections has been vindicated.

As we look ahead, we remain committed to defending election integrity laws across America and ensuring that states retain their constitutional authority to implement the security measures necessary for free and fair elections.

VICTORY: New York School Walks Back Decision To Tear Down Christian Posters and Ban Use of "Good News" From Bible Club Name

We secured a major win for religious liberty in our public schools.
After the ACLJ sent a legal demand letter to Carmel Central School District (CCSD) in New York on behalf of Jenna – a brave ninth-grade student – after school officials tore down her Christian club's Bible verse posters and banned the use of "Good News" from the Bible club's name. The district has now walked back its actions. In a written response, the school district has confirmed that Jenna's club can change the club's name to whatever it wants, the school has no objection to posters citing Bible verses or containing a cross, and Jenna has the same rights as any other student to share her faith on campus.

This is a critical victory, not just for Jenna but also for every student who seeks to live out their faith without fear of government censorship. It's what the law requires.

When Jenna tried to relaunch a Christian student group at Carmel High School – after being previously denied – she followed every procedure required. Her group was initially called the "Good News Club" and sought to meet after school for faith-based discussion, encouragement, and learning. But when she posted campus-wide flyers listing encouraging Bible verses and inviting students to join, the school took them down and told her the club's name had to be changed. They said the posters had "too many Bible verses." Jenna was told to rename the group "Alpha Omega Club" and to submit all religious content for administrative review.

That's when the ACLJ stepped in.

We sent a demand letter laying out how these actions were a direct violation of the Equal Access Act and the First Amendment. Schools may not censor religious viewpoints while allowing secular student groups full freedom. In fact, federal law is clear that once a school opens a limited public forum for student expression – such as clubs – it must treat all clubs equally, regardless of their religious content. In fact, the ACLJ argued and won a similar case before the U.S. Supreme Court in Board of Education v. Mergens 35 years ago.

After receiving the demand letter, the school district has reversed course and has agreed to comply with the law.

In a written response to the ACLJ, Carmel Central School District stated unequivocally: "The School District simply has no objection to Alpha Omega Club notices that cite to the Bible or contain a cross, or to [Jenna's] religious speech on school grounds."

This is a complete reversal of the district's earlier actions – and a direct result of our legal advocacy.

The school district also acknowledged that the club is officially recognized and has every right to post flyers and hold meetings like any other student organization. Jenna's club is recognized, her speech is protected, and the district now affirms that religious content on club materials is permitted.

Make no mistake – this is a win.

At the same time, we will vigilantly monitor the situation to ensure that Jenna and her fellow students are not subjected to any further unlawful censorship. But for now, the message is clear: Religious liberty is alive and well, and students do not shed their First Amendment rights at the schoolhouse gate.

We're proud to stand with students like Jenna – students of courage, conviction, and faith. And we will always stand ready to defend their rights when public schools cross the constitutional line.

This victory proves that when we stand up and speak out, we make a difference.

VICTORY: Walmart Works With ACLJ To Reaffirm Commitment to Religious Accommodations

We are pleased to report that Walmart, the largest employer in America, recently reaffirmed its commitment to accommodating employees who request religious accommodations to observe a weekly Sabbath. At the ACLJ, we previously worked with Walmart in the fall of 2024 on a similar matter and found them to be responsive and respectful of religious liberty. That same responsiveness was on full display again when we recently reached out on behalf of another client.

We were recently contacted by a Walmart employee in Louisiana who was experiencing adverse scheduling changes that impacted his ability to go to church on Sunday. For several years, he had maintained a schedule that accommodated his Sunday Sabbath observance.

However, following recent scheduling adjustments, his inability to work on Sundays – due to his religious convictions – resulted in a significant reduction in hours. In one instance, his schedule dropped to just 19.5 hours per week, jeopardizing his full-time status and associated benefits.

This raises serious concerns under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that under Title VII employers are required to accommodate the religious beliefs of employees if the accommodation does not pose an undue hardship on the overall context of the business. A religious belief to observe the Sabbath falls squarely within Title VII's broad definition of religion. Religious accommodations are to be evaluated by the employer on a case-by-case basis.

As soon as we became aware of this issue, we contacted Walmart directly. We are pleased to report that Walmart promptly investigated the situation and worked with us to resolve this matter. As a result of the ACLJ's representation and Walmart's quick action, our client's sincerely held religious beliefs are now being accommodated. Our client's schedule now reflects a full-time schedule while also maintaining Sundays off to observe the Sabbath.

This case is a powerful example of how employers can successfully navigate religious accommodation requests under Title VII. In this case – as in so many others – honoring a Sabbath observance posed no such hardship. It simply required open communication and a willingness to find a workable solution. Walmart's conduct should serve as a model for other employers across the country. Religious liberty is a fundamental American value, and when employers respect that liberty, everyone wins.

Sam Walton built Walmart on principles rooted in his Christian faith. The company's swift resolution of this matter shows that Walmart continues to reflect those foundational principles to this day. We thank Walmart's corporate leadership for working with us to bring this matter to a positive and purposeful resolution.

If you, or someone you know, is facing workplace challenges because of your faith, don't stay silent. Contact us. We're here to defend your rights – and ensure that no one has to choose between their faith and their job.