One religious freedom case at the Supreme Court isn't getting the sort of attention as others, despite how it's uniting groups that often disagree. So, why did the justices sound so skeptical in the courtroom? Amanda and Holly review this week's oral arguments in Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections, which involves the remedy available to a man whose religious freedom rights were violated when he was in prison. The violation isn't in question, so why is the remedy? Amanda and Holly review the details in this case, play audio from key moments in the courtroom, and discuss the statute that protects prisoners' religious freedom rights: The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 00:35): RLUIPA, RFRA, and this case

Amanda and Holly previewed the Landor case earlier this season – watch their conversation on BJC's YouTube channel.

BJC joined a diverse group of organizations on a friend-of-the-court brief in this case on the side of Mr. Landor – click this link to read the brief and see the groups who found common ground.

RLUIPA is the acronym for the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, passed by Congress in the year 2000. The acronym is often pronounced "Re-loop-ah." RFRA is the acronym for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, pronounced "Riff-rah."

For more on the 2020 decision in Tanzin v. Tanvir, read this article on our website: Supreme Court rules RFRA allows monetary damages against federal officials

Segment 2 (starting at 11:05): What happened in the courtroom? Arguments on behalf of Mr. Landor

The Supreme Court heard Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections on Monday, November 10. Visit the Supreme Court's website to read a transcript or hear the audio from the courtroom.

We played four clips from oral arguments in this segment.

• Zack Tripp's opening statement, representing Mr. Landor (from 00:15-2:02 in the audio of the arguments)
• Exchange between Justice Samuel Alito and Zack Tripp (from 20:00-21:25 in the oral arguments)
• Exchange between Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Zack Tripp (from 23:35-25:56 in the oral arguments)
• Exchange between Justice Elena Kagan and Libby A. Baird, assistant to the solicitor general (from 1:06:38-1:07:38 in the oral argument)

Segment 3 (starting at 31:31): What did the state of Louisiana argue?

We played one clip from the oral argument during this segment:

• Exchange between Justice Elena Kagan and Ben Aguiñaga, the solicitor general of Louisiana (from 1:38:33-1:40:26)

Read more about the arguments in this article by Amy Howe for SCOTUSblog: Court appears skeptical of prison inmate's religious liberty claim

Video of our episodes are now on YouTube! Click here for the season 7 playlist.

Do you want special emails about the show? Click here to sign up for our email list!

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

Today, we are bringing you a special presentation on the contested issue of "sanctuary," which continues to cut into the immigration debates in our country. Dr. Sergio M. González traces the sanctuary movement to its roots in the 1980s and examines how we arrived at a moment where mercy is met with repression. This presentation was given on the campus of the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn., on Oct. 22, 2025, as part of BJC's annual Walter B. and Kay W. Shurden Lectures on Religious Liberty and Separation of Church and State.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 00:35): Introduction

Dr. Sergio M. González is a historian of U.S. immigration, labor and religion. A professor at Marquette University, he is a co-founder and former organizer for the Dane Sanctuary Coalition.

He also is the co-creator of a podcast titled "Sanctuary: On the Border Between Church and State."

Segment 2 (starting at 04:45): Presentation from Dr. Sergio M. González

This is a recording of a lecture from Dr. Sergio González that took place Oct. 22, 2025, at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn. Watch the full presentation, including the audience Q&A, on BJC's YouTube channel at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSnDp8hPNIo

Dr. Gonzalez mentions a document called "Religious Liberty and Immigration: Legal Analysis of Past and Future Claims." You can access it on the website of the Law, Rights & Religion Project.

This program was part of BJC's annual Walter B. and Kay W. Shurden Lectures on Religious Liberty and Separation of Church and State. Learn more at BJConline.org/ShudenLectures.

Video of our episodes are now on YouTube! Click here for the season 7 playlist.

Do you want special emails about the show? Click here to sign up for our email list!

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

We hear a lot of misinformation about a long-standing part of the tax code that protects the nonprofit sector, and it's newly under attack in a questionable manner. On this episode, Amanda and Holly discuss the Johnson Amendment, what it does and doesn't do, and the concerning way the Trump administration is trying to undo it without going through a normal process. They also provide reminders of what all nonprofits – including houses of worship – can do without jeopardizing their 501(c)(3) status under that current law. It's a curious case – politicians say no one wants this part of the tax code, but it's proven popular over and over again. Join them for this conversation.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 00:35): The protections of – and support for – the Johnson Amendment

Video of our episodes are now on YouTube! Click here for the season 7 playlist.

Do you want special emails about the show? Click here to sign up for our email list!

Segment 2 (starting at 15:41): Various attempts to undermine and to protect this part of the tax code

Read more about the work of faith leaders to protect the Johnson Amendment throughout 2017 and into 2018 by visiting BJConline.org/faith-voices

Segment 3 (starting at 30:54): What's next?

For resources on the Johnson Amendment from BJC, visit our website at BJConline.org/JohnsonAmendment

The litigation mentioned in this program is continuing. There will be a hearing on this case November 25 in Dallas. The hearing was originally for November 7 in Washington, D.C., but it was rescheduled due to the ongoing government shutdown – Amanda and Holly discussed that briefly in last week's live episode.

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

In this LIVE conversation, Amanda and Holly take a moment to catch up and review some of the recent news since last week's program. They discuss how religious leaders have been engaging in peaceful protests of immigration raids, how the ongoing government shutdown is impacting court cases, a change in Oklahoma regarding Bible teaching in public schools, and more. This show first aired live on Thursday, October 23, at 11 a.m. Eastern Time on BJC's YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram channels.

SHOW NOTES:

Do you want special emails about the show, including notifications when we go live? Click here to sign up for our special email list!

Read more about how faith leaders are protesting immigration raids in this article by Jack Jenkins for Religion News Service: After clergy arrests, religious pushback to ICE expands in Chicago

Amanda and Holly talked about Ryan Walters and his edict to have certain Bibles in Oklahoma public school classrooms on Episode 2 of Season 6: Oklahoma and Texas try to force Bible teaching in public schools

Read this update on what's happening in Oklahoma now: New Oklahoma schools superintendent rescinds mandate for Bible instruction in schools

Hear Amanda on NPR's All Things Considered in this piece from Jason DeRose: Progressive Christians counter Christian Nationalism message

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

As the Supreme Court begins a new term, we can't ignore what else is going on in our country – attacks on the rule of law, weaponization of the Department of Justice, the militarization of American cities, disruptive and chaotic immigration enforcement, and a government shutdown. Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman are back for a new season of Respecting Religion to bring thoughtful conversations to these issues and more at the intersection of religion and the law. In the season 7 premiere, they focus on the current Supreme Court term, including a case with an egregious violation of a person's religious freedom rights that brought together unlikely allies.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 00:38): Welcome back to season 7

BJC (Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty) is also the home of Christians Against Christian Nationalism.

Amanda's book is titled How to End Christian Nationalism, and it is available wherever you get your books.:

Video of our episodes are now on YouTube! Click here for the season 7 playlist.

Do you want to receive special emails about the show? Click here to sign up for our email list!

Segment 2 (starting at 07:26): A disturbing case on religious freedom coming to the Court

Read about the three cases from last term in this article from BJC's magazine, Report from the Capital: Supreme Court issues decisions on religious charter school, exemptions and opt-out rights

Amanda and Holly mentioned Steve Vladeck's One First newsletter.

BJC joined a friend-of-the-court brief in Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections. Click here to read the brief and see the groups that came together across other ideological lines. Read more about the case in this article on our website. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Landor on November 10.

Here's another preview piece, by Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog: Court to decide whether government officials can be held personally liable for violating inmate's religious liberty

Segment 3 (starting at 26:42): What else can we expect from the Court?

Read more about Chiles v. Salazar in this article by Amy Howe for SCOTUSblog: Majority of court appears skeptical of Colorado's "conversion therapy" ban

You're invited! Join us in Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, Oct. 21-23 for a special event focussed on the Sanctuary movement. We're honored to welcome Dr. Sergio González, historian, author, and co-creator of the podcast Sanctuary: On the Border Between Church and State, to explore the history, challenges, and future of the movement. Visit BJConline.org/ShurdenLectures for more details and links to sign up.

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

With attacks on the rule of law, the militarization of troops in American cities, and a new Supreme Court term starting up, there is no better time to tune in to Respecting Religion. Join Holly and Amanda as they return for a new season to share analysis, opportunities for action, and ways to make sense of issues at the intersection of religion and the law. Respecting Religion is available on your favorite podcasting platform, and now, for the first time, with video on YouTube! We'll see you on October 16 for the season 7 premiere of Respecting Religion! Subscribe today, and hear previous episodes on our website: https://bjconline.org/respectingreligion/

On our season 6 finale, Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman explore some of the consequential decisions from the final days of the Supreme Court term, including Mahmoud v. Taylor – which involves parents who want to opt their children out of curriculum they find in conflict with their religious beliefs – and U.S. v. Skrmetti, which focuses on access to medical care for transgender youth. They discuss the real world implications of these and other recent rulings. Amanda and Holly also celebrate a decision from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals striking down Louisiana's law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom and share why this case might find its way up to the Supreme Court before too long.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 00:38): Recent activities and news

For the latest on the budget reconciliation bill and ways to make your voice known, visit BJConline.org/budgetbill2025

Segment 2 (starting at 07:01): A federal court decision and a Supreme Court case with far-reaching implications

Roake v. Brumley is the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals case that struck down the Louisiana law mandating the posting of the Ten Commandments in classrooms. Read more about the decision and BJC's brief on our website: Federal appeals court finds Louisiana's Ten Commandments law unconstitutional as Texas enacts a similar measure

Trump v. CASA is the case often called the "birthright citizenship" case that is about national injunctions. Amanda and Holly recommended listening to the oral arguments and reading the decision and the dissent. All are available on the Supreme Court's website.

Segment 3 (starting at 19:07): The decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor and its potential impact

Amanda and Holly discussed oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor in episode 15 of season 6. You can read the decision and the dissent on the Supreme Court's website.

Holly mentioned this piece on the case from Religion News Service: 'We were called book burners': Families react to SCOTUS LGBTQ+ books decision

Segment 4 (starting 46:13): U.S. v. Skrmetti and what's ahead for the Court

Amanda and Holly discussed U.S. v. Skrmetti in episode 6 of season 6. You can read the decision and the dissent on the Supreme Court's website.

For more on the case involving the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act that the Supreme Court will hear this fall, read this piece by Adam Liptak for The New York Times: Supreme Court to Hear Rastafarian Prisoner's Suit Over Shaved Dreadlocks

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

What's the difference between religious privilege and religious freedom? How does Christian nationalism spread? Why do so many ideas that start in Texas expand to other parts of the country? On this podcast, we bring you a special panel discussion on Christian nationalism in the Texas public sphere, recorded live on April 8. It features BJC Executive Director (and Respecting Religion co-host) Amanda Tyler, scholar David Brockman, professor Mark Chancey, and journalist Robert Downen. Moderated by Jack Jenkins, it was part of an all-day event focused on telling the story of religion in Texas through journalism, hosted by the Texas Tribune in partnership with Religion News Service, the Institute for Diversity and Civic Life, and Southern Methodist University's Religious Studies department.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 00:33): Introducing today's show and the panelists

Learn more about the Texas Tribune's April 8 event titled "Telling the story of religion in Texas through journalism" on the website of the Texas Tribune. The website page dedicated to the event includes YouTube videos of each speaker and panel presentation.

The day-long event was held in partnership with the Texas Tribune, Religion News Service, the Institute for Diversity and Civic Life, and Southern Methodist University's Religious Studies department.

Segment 2 (starting at 02:51): Panel presentation

You can watch a video of this presentation on YouTube, including a Q&A following the conversation.

The panelists are:

• Amanda Tyler, executive director of BJC (Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty), lead organizer of Christians Against Christian Nationalism, and co-host of this podcast
• Dr. David Brockman, a non-resident scholar in religion and public policy at Rice University's Baker Institute who also serves as an adjunct professor at Texas Christian University
• Dr. Mark Chancey, professor of religious studies at SMU
• Robert Downen, senior writer at "Texas Monthly"

The moderator is Jack Jenkins, national reporter at Religion News Service.

NOTE: After this panel was recorded, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott did sign legislation requiring every Texas public school classroom to display the Ten Commandments. Read more in this piece by Sameea Kamal for the Texas Tribune: Texas will require public school classrooms to display Ten Commandments under bill signed by governor

Amanda and Holly talked about the Texas Bible curriculum in episode 2 of this season: Oklahoma and Texas try to force Bible teaching in public schools

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

With decisions from the Supreme Court, a new travel ban, and a federally militarized presence in Los Angeles, there are many activities in our world that deserve attention. Amanda and Holly discuss several current events in this episode, including the revival of one of the ugliest policies of the first Trump administration. Plus, they review the unanimous decision in a Supreme Court case about religious exemptions to employment law and discuss the Court's decision not to hear a case involving the protection of sacred land.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 00:37): Recent and still-developing news

Holly and Amanda discussed changes in policy about sensitive locations in S6, Episode 10.

We discussed the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia in a special episode released April 21 with Melissa Rogers.

We discussed the harmful school voucher provision in the "big beautiful bill" during their live episode, released May 27. Hear the episode at this link or in your podcast feed, or watch it on YouTube.

Join BJC for a webinar on the problems with the budget reconciliation bill on Monday, June 16, at 2:30 p.m. Click here to register for the event, which is hosted by BJC, NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, and Bread for the World.

Read more about the fallout from Rep. Mary Miller referring to a Sikh prayer leader as a "Muslim" and erroneously claiming our country was founded as a "Christian nation" in this article by Andrew Solender for Axios: Rep. Mary Miller faces bipartisan fury over "ignorant" Sikh comment

In memory of Dr. Walter Brueggemann, listen to his 2019 conversation with Amanda on our podcast series exploring the dangers of Christian nationalism: Theological view of Christian nationalism with Walter Brueggemann

Segment 2 (starting at 13:17): The new travel ban

After President Trump issued his new travel ban on June 4, Amanda released a statement you can read on BJC's website: BJC condemns new travel ban as 'state-sanctioned discrimination'

Visit BJC's website to read more about the case of Trump v. Hawaii and the history of the travel ban.

Support the NO BAN Act: Click here to use BJC's form to contact your members of Congress about the legislation.

Segment 3 (starting 20:09): The decision in Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission

Supreme Court decisions we are waiting for include:

• Mahmoud v. Taylor (Hear a discussion of oral arguments in S6, Ep. 15)
• U.S. v. Skrmetti (Hear a discussion of oral arguments in S6, Ep. 06)

The case Apache Stronghold v. U.S. involves the sacred land of Chí'chil Biłdagoteel — loosely translated in English as "Oak Flat." Read more about the denial of cert on BJC's website: U.S. Supreme Court declines Oak Flat petition, allows for federal transfer of sacred land to mining company. Amanda and Holly talked about this issue on a podcast back in 2022: S3, Ep. 17: Religious freedom and our Indigenous neighbors: Save Oak Flat.

Amanda and Holly talked about the oral arguments in Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin in Ep. 12: Back to SCOTUS: Regular business in disturbing times

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

A case with a thin record is raising plenty of questions at the Supreme Court. In this episode, Amanda and Holly examine the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor, which involves parents who want to opt their children out of public school curriculum they say conflicts with their religious beliefs. But, what's the difference between expected exposure and unconstitutional coercion? Does age matter? What happens when opt-out options become too burdensome and overwhelming to accommodate? Amanda and Holly examine the issues in this case as well as the challenges for the school district and for the parents. They also share what the oral arguments revealed about the justices' interest in the books and discussions outside of the courtroom.

SHOW NOTES

Segment 1 (starting at 01:50): Remembering Justice David Souter

Amanda and Holly released a live mini-episode on Tuesday, May 27, to review the Supreme Court decision in the religious charter school case, the voucher proposal in the budget reconciliation bill, and a court decision halting the dismantling of the Department of Education. Hear the episode at this link or in your podcast feed, or watch it on YouTube.

Amanda and Holly mention the other two church-state cases this term addressed in previous episodes:

• Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin in Ep. 12: Back to SCOTUS: Regular business in disturbing times
• Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board, et al. v. Drummond in Ep. 14: The blockbuster SCOTUS case over religious charter schools

BJC Executive Director Emeritus J. Brent Walker wrote a reflection piece on Justice David Souter when the justice retired in 2009: Walker reflects on Souter's Supreme Court tenure

Amy Howe wrote a piece on Justice Souter for SCOTUSblog: David Souter, retired Supreme Court justice, dies at 85

Segment 2 (starting at 06:58): The facts (that we know) in the case and what's at stake

BJC has a post on our website describing Mahmoud v. Taylor: In oral argument, U.S. Supreme Court wrestles with the limits of public school parents' opt-out rights

The U.S. Supreme Court has a transcript of oral arguments and the audio recording of oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor available on its website.

Segment 3 (starting 25:54): The two big substantive points from the oral argument

We played two clips from the oral argument in this segment:

• Justice Elena Kagan and Eric Baxter, who argued on behalf of the group of parents (the petitioners)
• Justice Samuel Alito and Eric Baxter

Amanda and Holly talked about the Texas Bible curriculum in episode 2 of this season: Oklahoma and Texas try to force Bible teaching in public schools

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.