Take a look at three cases working through our federal court system that are worth keeping an eye on from a religious liberty perspective.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade, holding there is no right to an abortion under the U.S. Constitution, has led abortion-rights activists in multiple states to make religious freedom arguments for abortion.

Will government-sponsored prayer meetings become the norm after Kennedy? Or will courts determine that there is no long-standing historical practice of government-initiated tent revivals?

True Baptist heritage, scholars explain, rejects everything the ideology of Christian nationalism stands for.

The court’s ruling is not the last word on this matter. Congress can fix this problem.

In the essay entitled “Religious Intolerance,” Tyler and co-author Dr. John Corrigan, Professor of History and Religion at Florida State University, explained that “religious bigotry, like all structural bigotry, is exercised in order to hold power.”

The dissent highlighted the many facts that the majority ignored or misstated in characterizing Kennedy’s prayers as private and quiet. No student on the field or parent in the stands should have to weigh their participation against the isolating and offending threat of it turning into a religious spectacle.

BJC Executive Director Amanda Tyler spoke to CBS News about the ways Christian nationalism “absolutely was on display” during President Trump’s remarks at an event last week and the insurrection itself.

In its Carson v. Makin ruling, the Supreme Court sidestepped concerns raised by Maine officials and religious liberty advocates – including BJC – that supporting religious education with taxpayer dollars undermines historic principles of church-state separation that states should have the leeway to protect.

The U.S. Department of State released its annual Report on International Religious Freedom, as required by federal law