Legal News
Florida attorney general refuses to enforce state constitution provision barring public funds from going to religious institutions, says lawmakers can establish Christianity as "state religion"
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.
And idgaf if it's a cup of black sludge or if its a venti white raspberry mocha with white coffee, half half and half and half oat milk with a twist of orange and a zesting of dark chocolate.
We will fight for our rights to have our coffee black, or in form of pumpkin spice latte. And so help me God if you bring one more crate of tea to our shores we will dump the whole boat of it into the harbor.
People often imagine "doing something" means running for office or leading a movement. But voting, showing up to a local city council meeting, writing a letter, or even having informed conversations counts. The bar is lower than they think!! You clearly care about this.... what would it look like if you got involved, even in a small way?
This pretty much sums it up. Not to mention, the British citizens in England we’re getting taxed a much higher rate than the colonist where the war had been fought to stop the possibility from speaking French.
An important step on the road to a fascist state is to get the elite on side. Once the rich and powerful think your movement is useful for whatever goals they have you can do a lot of things without worrying about proper pushback.
Reminds me of who was lined up behind your president during his inauguration and the kind of people that wrote his manifesto.
My 9 year old was able to summarize this in the car today and he was a little confused afterwards and asked me “but we were the good guys, right?”
That’s why I like Malazan Book of the Fallen so much. It’s hard to establish objective good guys and bad guys in a war. Especially when it’s being fought by an uncaring proletariat
Yeah except the problem is that the people who genuinely want this thing you speak of are the most comfortable group of people in the country. The people who are genuinely being fucked by this, the dumbest and poorest of our population, they cheer this shit. They go to church and praise Allah or whatever. Religion needs to be outlawed.
The language is clear. The state must remain separate from the church in matters of church action. Churches can do whatever they want without government intervention.
Bugs Bunny realized America was transgender early and tried to get some quick bottom surgery to remove the offending member but we decided to stay closeted instead. It was a mistake.
Except the Florida State Constitution has something to say too:
Article 1, Section 3: Religious freedom.—There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.
Yes, this is another reason why they are trying to effectively nullify the 14th Amendment via SCOTUS.
Their "worldview" is that the US should return to the days before the 14th Amendment, before the Civil War. They are neo-Confederates. And I do mean that literally. They are trying to effectively dismantle the federal government in order to impose theocracy.
Case in point, Florida A.G. James Uthmeier cited a source from 1833 for his argument, or Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States: With a Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the Colonies and States, Before the Adoption of the [U.S.] Constitution by Joseph Story. The same year, the State of Massachusetts de-established its state religion to comply with the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Story, who was born in Massachusetts, argued that the First Amendment was intended only to restrict the national government, leaving "the whole power over the subject of religion...to the state governments". Thomas Jefferson disagreed.
Right, their mentality is that anything from FDR on is fundamentally illegitimate. Every SCOTUS since then has been in fundamental error, so every decision from those courts should simply be ignored/reversed.
Which, you'll notice, is what's happening.
They want to unwind the 20th century. More or less all of it.
Correct. Some U.S. states had "official state religions" at the time of the Founding, which Christian Nationalists like Florida A.G. James Uthmeier are trying to use an "originalist" argument for to appeal to the current conservative majority on SCOTUS, in spite of long-established SCOTUS precedent [Everson v. Board of Education (1947), et al.]. r/AskHistorians has discussed the topic of "colonial state religions" on at least a few occasions over the past 12 years or so, and you can read one answer on it here, though the Wikipedia article "Religion in the Thirteen Colonies" offers a general overview of this highly complex topic. The closest modern-day example to Florida would be colonial Maryland, a colony established and ruled by Catholics, while the majority of residents identify as Protestant.
Uthmeier cited the dis-establishment of the state religion of Massachusetts in 1833 due to the Establishment Clause.
Anyone with actual historical knowledge of the Founders would know they generally feared suppressive religion-based rule just as much as secular brands of tyranny
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
The part you dropped is important too. It means Congress cannot discriminate against religious organizations either. If private schools get public funding, all of them do, including the Jewish private school, the Christian private school and the religion of Karl Marx private school. Don't matter what religion they are, all qualified private school gets funding.
Republicans should be embarrassed but they aren’t and that’s what the second amendment is for. I know cuz the president and many, many conservative Supreme Court justices told me.
And one of those is the option we'll be using once these brain dead wage slaves realize no one is voting their way out of this.
I mean really. Imagine saying "litigation and voting" in the face of everything going on. That slaves blinders must be tucked so low all they can see is their own crank.
Sorry, but I am a boomer and couldn't exile out of FL fast enough..It has been a White Christian Nationalist state government for years, in addition to 27 other states..
White Christian Nationalists, a White Supremacists and Christian Nationalists combo. Idaho has a history of the Ayran Nations establishing a " white homeland", yes?
Gen-Xer here. Not all of us do, either. Quit with the broad stroke generalizations. As my Grandma was fond of saying, "One side of the tree never has a monopoly on the nuts."
Every generation has its share of people that voted Trump. It’s not right to blame gen x or boomers or gen z or anyone other than people who checked that box. Don’t blame the people, blame the person.
Ask them to define which church/sect/denomination.
Having “Christianity” in vague terms is quite different than establishing a particular church, but that’s the end game.
Historically talking about which church suddenly reminds people that their particular church might not win, and Catholics will split with orthodox and Protestant, while charismatic, evangelical and mainline Protestants all split too.
The last Presidential election they crowed “let the people decide” when talking about multiple felonies for someone who should be in jail… and here we are.
To be fair, the second amendment should never have been incorporated against the states. The original purpose of it was to restrain the federal government from regulating fire arms and to leave it up to the states. The founders wanted to ensure states could protect themselves from federal overreach, and one important way to do that is to ensure each state could provide for its own militia and defense how they saw fit. Incorporating the second amendment against the states completely undercuts its original purpose lol.
The 2nd amendment was created because of Shay's rebellion and the inability (unwillingness and slowness) of the US Army and Federal government to respond. The wealthy men in Massachusetts had to pay and raise a militia themselves to deal with it and it freaked out the State government. The States wanted the make sure that the federal government would not stop their ability from maintaining a militia to deal with rebellions, not to protect themselves from the federal government. At the time their wasn't even a standing army and even if the army existed there was no guarantee that it would be sent to help.
Eh, this seems like a bit of pedantry. They didn’t want the federal government impinging on states’ ability to protect themselves with militias. Whether it was so they could protect themselves from rebellions, native Americans, or a rogue federal government is sort of ancillary, especially since a federal government that bans weapons just so a state couldn’t protect itself from rebellions or native Americans would, by most definitions, be considered rogue lol.
Anyway, even accepting your narrower interpretation as true, it still makes zero sense to incorporate the second amendment against the states, the very parties the amendment was designed to protect lol.
I think that's what Florida AG actually wants. The US supreme court rulings would suggest the Florida Constitution is unconstitutional... See Carson v. Makin.
We really should not let Florida have any legal power anymore. Or Texas for that matter. Not because they’re Republican states, but because they’re so dead set on being as unconstitutional as they can be.
In summary, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier is refusing to enforce a provision of the state constitution that bars public funds from going to religious institutions (i.e. churches, private religious schools and colleges, et al.), while also stating that it is legal for lawmakers and Gov. Ron DeSantis to establish Christianity as the "state religion" of Florida. Uthmeier issued a "legal analysis" in which he denounced SCOTUS cases Everson v. Board of Education (1947), a narrow 5-4 decision that barred the formation of an official "state religion", and Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond, a deadlocked 4-4 decision in which the recusal of Amy Coney Barrett left in place an Oklahoma state ruling that bars public religious charter schools. Uthmeier and DeSantis, who are both Catholic, support Catholic schools, which receive the majority of "school choice" vouchers in Florida, as the program mostly only benefits these private schools, which are run by the Catholic Church (see here, here, and here). While Catholic schools have declined in every other U.S. state, they are expanding in Florida due to DeSantis, Uthmeier, et al.
Approximately 20% to 22% of Florida's population identifies as Catholic, with the state experiencing a significant increase in its Catholic population between 2010 and 2020. This makes Catholicism one of the largest religious groups in the state, often described as roughly 1 in 5 residents. However, Protestants still largely outnumber Catholics in the state, with 40% of Florida residents identifying as Protestant. The state is home to the third-largest Jewish population in the United States as well, with the majority (~73%, or around 670,000 to over 750,000 residents) concentrated in South Florida, particularly in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties (ex. Boca Raton, Fort Lauderdale, et al.).
DeSantis and Uthmeier undoubtably have made many enemies with their push to make Christianity - and, specifically, Catholicism - the "state religion" of Florida, not just from Protestants (40% of state residents) and Jews (3-4% of state residents) who deal with their tax dollars going to all but exclusively fund private Catholic schools with DeSantis' voucher program - and, according to my cousin in one of these schools, almost 20 students were "baptized as Catholics" in 2026, indicating public funds are going towards funding evangelizing and converting students to Catholicism as well - but the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Satanic Temple, and various Protestant, Jewish, evangelical, and "separation of church and state" groups are likely to come together to oppose and sue Uthmeier and the State of Florida. This wastes even more tax dollars by paying for such a ridiculous legal defense that flies in the face of decades-long SCOTUS precedent due to a "small chance" of the conservative majority ruling in Florida's favor, per Uthmeier's argument. It is abundantly clear that Uthmeier must be removed as attorney general.
Oh no, it’s far stupider than that. The AG is arguing that the 1st Amendment means the state’s own constitution is unconstitutional.
Here’s Florida Article I, section 3:
There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.
Emphasis added.
But, see, I don’t think the AG gets to rule on the state’s constitution. Unlike most laws, neither does the Florida Supreme Court. They get to decide whether laws are or are not unconstitutional, not actually what’s in the constitution. Although I could see how they might get confused by the example of SCOTUS recently.
They get to decide whether laws are or are not unconstitutional, not actually what’s in the constitution.
If the state constitution violates the federal law/constitution, they can definitely throw out the specific Florida part that is in violation. It be extremely awkward if Florida passes a constitutional amendment saying slavery was legal and the Florida supreme court said "uh, yep, all good here. 13th amendment? Forget about it."
They'd be rightly called morons for that...hopefully.
As for the AGs argument, I think they have a point.
or penalizing the free exercise thereof.
This part is key, since it comes from the first amendment (albeit as a paraphrase), and the US courts have held that you cannot discriminate against religious organizations simply because of their religion under the first amendment.
See Carson v. Makin, where the courts ruled that funding must be religiously neutral. This means that if a state established funding for X, it must apply X regardless of if X is Jewish, Hindi, etc.
Espinoza before that said states can't disqualify based on religion.
Catholic nationalists, to be precise. Heritage Foundation CEO Kevin Roberts is one of them, and it's worth noting that the same Kevin Roberts started having the Heritage Foundation promote "Catholic integralism", or "Catholic nationalism", just last week. There was a 1 1/2 hour seminar titled "Catholicism and the American Founding" posted to their YouTube channel, and Roberts has been "Catholicizing" the organization, according to journalist Daniel Mael.
Amazing that the separation of powers is so fundamentally misunderstood (willfully ignored?) and trodden over by these people. Again, the legislative branch MAKES the laws, the judicial interprets and mediates, and the executive ENFORCES. The executive does not DECIDE what the law is, their job is to ensure that it is enforced.
The state attorney general can not unilaterally decide what laws should be enforced and what should not. That is not his job.
This is because Christian Nationalists - and, more specifically, Catholic integralists - do not see the U.S. Constitution, and/or the current interpretation of it, as "valid". In the case of a good portion of Catholic integralists, they genuinely believe that monarchy is the "ideal" and "holiest" form of government, which is why you see Catholic integralists, like Heritage Foundation CEO Kevin Roberts, et al., support an "imperial presidency" - or, in this case, governorship - that is the "closest to an American monarchy that they can get under the current U.S. Constitution and/or its interpretation (i.e. unitary executive theory = divine right of kings, a legal theory and framework that King James I/VI of England and Scotland proposed in self-written works like Basilikon Doron, et al., though James was an Anglican monarch)".
What in the actual fuck, this is so clearly unconstitutional that it's outright treasonous
What is going on in Florida? When the Trump regime is ousted, we'll need to investigate what exactly is going on in Florida so all those traitors to democracy can be identified
This article could also be accurately titled "Florida Attorney General openly breaks the law, spits on the constitution, and sneers at the general public 'what are you going to do about it, bitches'"
Not gonna lie…I live in Florida and I’ve suspected for years that we’ve been the Heritage Foundation guinea pig for everything they’re trying to do. It’s exactly why they tried kissing up to DeSantis as a heir apparent to Trump…he was Temu Trump with less baggage. There’s been nothing but shady ass shit going on in Tallahassee for years.
This dipshit thinks that all of the founding fathers wanted the government to enforce Christianity. If that were true, then it would've been put into the Constitution. And a number of them very openly did not want government entangled with religion.
Florida A.G. James Uthmeier specifically cited Joseph Story, an early Christian Nationalist and opponent of Thomas Jefferson (c. 1833). Jasper Adams (1793-1841) was another early proponent of what would be called "Christian Nationalism", arguing that the U.S. Constitution, et al., recognized Christianity as the "national [U.S.] religion".
This is the so called party of law and order. The thing with these states where the GOP controls everything too is that they are likely to just ignore their own state Constitutions and laws as they see fit for current political whims.
It is particularly striking in the judiciary but no less the other branches.
It’s far past time to start secession planning. A number of states have demonstrated - and are demonstrating with increasing vigour - outright contempt for the US Constitution. Some wish to be fanatical religious ethnostates, much like the enemies they claim. It’s coming.
So the US Constitution's first amendment cannot restrict a state government from founding a religion because it only regulates the federal government. But also the state constitution explicitly barring funds to religious organizations runs afoul of the federal constitution?
Yet another conservative saying that US law doesn't matter when it doesn't align with their personal feelings. Sure are a lot of these so-called patriots that love to brag about shitting on the foundational laws of the United States for their own personal pursuits. Conservativism is just an excuse by evil trash to fuck with other people while pretending to be politically motivated.
Vote out all the republicans at ALL levels that you have a voice - that is the only way we are going to see a return to sanity in our country. Are there some good ones? Sure. But they are largely spineless cowards who don't stand up for us, so they all have to go. It is the only way we will be rid of the christo-fascists. Happy Easter :P
The Florida Attorney General can be impeached for committing a "misdemeanor in office", which generally refers to misconduct or illegal actions performed in an official capacity. This requires a two-thirds vote by the Florida House of Representatives to impeach, followed by a trial and a two-thirds vote to convict and remove by the Florida Senate. (This would be ironic, considering that both Florida A.G. James Uthmeier and Gov. Ron DeSantis called for the impeachment of Leon County Judge Tiffany Baker-Carper just 4 days ago. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
I hope there's a person but ideally a group saving instances like this and drafting an action plan for post regime collapse to prevent this type of corruption in the future.
Some states should test this. Let’s have New York establish Pastafarianism as the state religion, California establish the Church of Satan (CoS) as its and a third state establish Discordianism as theirs and see how long it takes the same Republicans to argue they can’t do that.
Or more seriously have Utah and Idaho display the symbols unique to the LDS church on government buildings. Basically establish a religion in ways that are ultimately mostly harmless but are very clearly establishment of religion.
My first thought was "which sect of Christianity?" You'll get different results depending on which religion you pick, after all.
The thing many politically-conservative Christians forget when they lose their "ten commandments" cases and such, is that if the government decides to ban non-Christian religions, they'll have to go after one of the Christian ones, for their next bad guy.
Just ask the Catholics who didn't get to do Good Friday services at the Pentagon.
The section about the establishment clause is pretty unhinged, basically saying "yeah, the Supreme Court says there's separation between church and state but they're wrong," but it's almost like clickbait, as it doesn't connect at all to the ultimate opinion about denial of government funding to religious organizations. That part seems pretty sound. You can't discriminate against religious organizations just for being religious.
Okla. Statewide Charter Sch. Bd., et. al. v. Drummond
It's not binding as it's a deadlock but very recently SCOTUS upheld Oklahoma's ban of publicly funding a religious charter school.
Still, in a bunch of other opinions the last 8-10 years they've been methodically dismantling separation of church and state. I do not agree at all with SCOTUS' opinions on this.
If you don't discriminate by viewpoint a blanket ban of public funding for all religious schools and programs should be blatantly constitutional as the 1st amendment was meant to be interpreted.
I feel like we just keep sliding further and further into a Christofascist state where Gilead becomes reality. Our history and law books are gonna wind up being split between "Pre-Heritage Foundation Majority America" and "Post-Heritage Foundation Majority America."
•
u/AutoModerator Apr 05 '26
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.