In recent years, religious freedom cases have increasingly drawn public attention, often framed as conservative victories. Indeed, recent judicial and legislative successes for politically conservative religious groups have sparked concern from many on the political left. However, a closer examination reveals that religious liberty has historically and continues to protect progressive interests as well.
Recent Supreme Court Cases and Their Potential Impact
At the end of March and throughout April 2025, the Supreme Court heard arguments in several crucial religious freedom cases. These cases could significantly reshape the boundaries of religious liberty. For instance, favorable rulings could grant religious employers additional tax breaks, allow religious parents to exempt their children from classes that discuss LGBTQ+ issues, and extend public funding to religious charter schools.
Joseph Blankholm, writing in The Fulcrum, highlights the stakes clearly: “Religious freedom in these cases is about conservatives’ religious right to be exempt from certain laws and taxes. They give a Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees a chance to carve three new religion-shaped holes in American law.”
Progressives’ Historical Victories in Religious Freedom
While recent cases may spotlight conservative interests, historically, religious freedom has robustly supported progressive causes and diverse religious minorities. The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment has repeatedly protected groups across the ideological spectrum.
A notable example occurred in 2019 when Scott Warren successfully argued in federal court that his religious freedom protected him from prosecution for leaving supplies for migrants crossing the Sonoran Desert. His case paralleled the successful sanctuary movement defense from the 1980s, when religious leaders sheltered migrants from federal authorities.
Furthermore, progressive religious institutions regularly benefit from tax exemptions and zoning law exceptions. For instance, California’s passage of the “Yes In God’s Backyard” (YIGBY) legislation allows churches to construct larger affordable housing units in areas otherwise restricted by zoning laws, directly benefiting progressive social justice causes.
The Supreme Court’s Non-Political Imperative
Despite perceptions that Supreme Court rulings align predictably with the political affiliations of appointing presidents, it is vital to remember that the Court is not inherently political. Justices are bound by precedent and judicial philosophy rather than political allegiance. Thus, predicting outcomes solely based on appointee origins is misguided.
Blankholm notes, however, that “the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of religious people and groups more than 86 percent of the time since John Roberts became Chief Justice in 2005.” Yet, this statistic alone should not overshadow the broader principle that religious freedom protections remain ideologically neutral at their core.
Progressives’ Hesitation Toward Religion
An underlying factor complicating this discourse is the widespread skepticism toward religion among many progressives. This skepticism can make any ruling favorable to religious organizations feel inherently negative to those on the left. Blankholm’s research underscores this tension: “In my research, I’ve found that nonreligious people can have a strong, visceral dislike for religion. They associate it with authority, groupthink, and dogma rather than community, tradition, and progressive politics.”
Despite this skepticism, progressives have historically relied on and benefited from religious freedom laws, even if reluctantly. Atheists, agnostics, and spiritual individuals have equally utilized these protections, illustrating that religious freedom is not confined to conservative religious groups.
Embracing Religious Freedom Across the Spectrum
Religious freedom, as a legal and ethical principle, is fundamentally inclusive. It has historically offered protection and advocacy not only to traditional religious conservatives but also to progressive communities, religious minorities, atheists, agnostics, and spiritual practitioners. As Blankholm aptly concludes, “Now’s the time for progressives to get over our purity politics and our bias against religion. Now’s the time to start exercising our religious freedom.”
As society continues to grapple with complex issues intersecting religion and public policy, recognizing the inclusive and universal nature of religious freedom is critical. Moving beyond polarized perspectives allows us to appreciate how this fundamental right protects diverse expressions of belief and conscience, reinforcing its enduring importance in a pluralistic society.
Steve Bowcut is an award-winning journalist. He is an editor and writer for Religious Freedom Under Fire as well as other security and non-security online publications. Follow and connect with Steve on Twitter, Substack, and Facebook.
