Government · Nationwide · August 18, 2026
Vox: Supreme Court's Post-2020 Rulings Have Reshaped Religious Liberty Law
Vox senior correspondent Ian Millhiser published an analysis on August 18 arguing that the Supreme Court's Republican-appointed majority has fundamentally altered how religious exemption cases are decided since Amy Coney Barrett joined the bench. The piece centers on Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo (2020), a case over New York's Covid-era attendance caps on houses of worship. Before that ruling, states had latitude to regulate religious institutions the same as comparable secular venues, intervening only if faith groups were singled out for worse treatment. Millhiser writes that Roman Catholic Diocese changed this: churches must now receive the most favorable treatment given to any secular business, even one bearing little resemblance to a church, effectively requiring a 'least restrictive means' standard. The article states this new approach has generally favored religious plaintiffs, particularly in disputes involving sexual conduct issues like same-sex marriage and contraception, and predicts continued conflict over public schools and anti-discrimination law. No new ruling was issued; this is legal analysis of an existing precedent's trajectory.
Source: vox.com
Why Bible-Believing Christians Should Care
Bible-believing Christians should read this piece carefully: it is written from a perspective that treats robust protection for religious exercise as a problem to be corrected, not a constitutional good. But churches being free from government mandates that would force closure or compliance beyond what secular businesses face is a legitimate liberty interest, not merely a partisan win. Christians are commanded, 'We ought to obey God rather than men' (Acts 5:29), and a legal framework that respects the church's right to operate under equal, not inferior, treatment protects that obedience. Believers should understand how this precedent works, since the same legal principles will be invoked in future cases — sometimes by churches defending biblical practice, sometimes by others seeking exemptions Christians would not endorse.
We ought to obey God rather than men. — Acts 5:29
Share this alert
From the book
Courts are the last line of defense for constitutional rights, and they can also be used affirmatively. Defensively, Christians have to support legal defense organizations that fight strategic cases to establish precedent, building a wall of case law that protects the rights of conscience. This is Counter-Rule 13 operating across institutions rather than individuals.
— Chapter 20, “The Legal Arena”
Get the BookKnow where you stand
The free 4-minute assessment identifies your mountain and your institution’s capture phase — so alerts like this one arrive matched to where you actually stand.
Facing this yourself? Ask. Describe what is happening and get what the book, Scripture, and the law of your state say, with the exact words to use. Your first one is free.