The past month has witnessed significant developments for religious freedom in courts, legislatures, and communities worldwide. The table below summarises five notable stories, and the sections that follow provide context and analysis.
| # | Story & Date | Location | Key Issue |
| 1 | U.S. Supreme Court grants parents’ opt‑out rights in Mahmoud v. Taylor (Decided Jun 27 2025) | United States (Maryland) | Public school curriculum with LGBTQ+ storybooks; court upholds parents’ right to opt out their children based on religious beliefs. supremecourt.gov |
| 2 | Federal judge halts Washington law requiring priests to break confessional seal (Ruling issued Jul 18, 2025) | United States (Washington) | Law would have forced Catholic priests to report confessional admissions of child abuse; judge says it violates free exercise. deseret.com. |
| 3 | Maharashtra to cancel Scheduled‑Caste certificates for non‑Hindu converts (Statement on Jul 17, 2025) | India (Maharashtra) | Chief Minister promises to cancel certificates fraudulently obtained by Christians or Muslims and to toughen anti‑conversion rules. theprint.in. |
| 4 | Chinese authorities demolish over 300 Buddhist stupas and a sacred statue in Drakgo, Tibet (Report released Jul 23, 2025) | China/Tibet (Sichuan) | Central Tibetan Administration reports that Chinese forces razed stupas and statues and restricted information, erasing religious heritage. hindustantimes.com. |
| 5 | World Evangelical Alliance report criticises Rwanda’s religious regulation laws (Jul 23, 2025) | Rwanda | WEA’s submission to the U.N. Universal Periodic Review argues that Rwanda’s 2018 law and 2025 amendment closing thousands of churches and imposing strict qualifications do not meet international human‑rights standards. christiandaily.com. |
1. U.S. Supreme Court affirms parents’ right to opt out of controversial curriculum
On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, a challenge brought by Muslim, Catholic, and Orthodox Christian parents in Maryland against a public‑school policy that introduced LGBTQ‑inclusive storybooks without allowing parents to excuse their children. The Court held that the parents were entitled to a preliminary injunction because they were likely to succeed on their claim that the school board’s policy substantially interfered with their religious duty to direct their children’s religious upbringing (supremecourt.gov). The syllabus noted that parents have a longstanding constitutional right to “direct the religious upbringing of their children,” and that governmental policies cannot “substantially interfere” with that practice (supremecourt.gov).
The majority reasoned that for many people of faith, few acts are more important than educating children according to religious beliefs, and the Constitution protects parents’ decisions in this area (supremecourt.gov). By denying notice and forbidding opt‑outs for lessons that conflict with parents’ religious teachings, the school board placed parents in an untenable position. It imposed a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. The ruling triggered celebrations among advocates for religious liberty. Alliance Defending Freedom noted that the decision was “a monumental victory for parents” and emphasized that schools cannot “indoctrinate children” in ways that conflict with parents’ beliefs (adflegal.org). The case has broader implications for educational curricula nationwide and highlights ongoing tensions between nondiscrimination policies and religiously motivated parental rights.
2. Judge blocks Washington law requiring priests to violate confessional seal
On July 18, 2025, U.S. District Judge David G. Estudillo issued a temporary injunction against Washington state’s newly enacted Senate Bill 5375, which would have compelled clergy to report confessions of child abuse or neglect. The law, passed in May and due to take effect on July 27, mandated that priests break the sacramental seal of confession or face up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine (deseret.com). In his ruling, Judge Estudillo held that the statute “burdens plaintiffs’ free exercise of religion” because it forces clergy to choose between following their faith and complying with state law (deseret.com).
The court noted that confession is “inviolable” in the Catholic tradition and that breaking the seal constitutes a canonical crime (deseret.com). Representatives of the Catholic Bishops of Washington and the Orthodox Church argued that priests already follow mandatory reporting for abuse outside confession and that the state offered no compelling explanation for singling out confession (deseret.com). Religious liberty groups applauded the decision, saying it protects the “sacred space” of confession and reaffirms that government officials cannot pry into religious rituals (deseret.com). The case is likely to proceed to further litigation but underscores the importance of clerical privilege and the First Amendment.
3. Maharashtra vows to cancel Scheduled‑Caste certificates of converts to Christianity or Islam
In India, religious freedom debates often intersect with caste and reservation policies. During a legislative council session on July 17, 2025, Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis announced that Scheduled Caste (SC) certificates fraudulently obtained by individuals who had converted to religions other than Hinduism, Buddhism, or Sikhism would be canceled (theprint.in). He stated that a 2024 Supreme Court verdict clarified that only these three religions are eligible for SC reservation benefits; converts to Christianity or Islam using SC certificates for jobs or elections would face revocation of their credentials (theprint.in). Fadnavis also said the government plans to introduce “strong provisions” against religious conversion through coercion or deceit (theprint.in).
The chief minister’s remarks responded to claims that “crypto Christians” were misusing reservation benefits by secretly practising Christianity while officially identifying as Scheduled Castes (theprint.in). Critics argue that cancelling certificates based on religious affiliation violates India’s constitutional promise of freedom of religion and equal treatment. Observers also fear that tougher anti‑conversion measures could further marginalise minority faiths. While Fadnavis insisted that voluntary conversions would remain legal, the proposal indicates a broader trend of linking caste benefits to religious identity and could fuel social tensions.
4. Chinese authorities demolish Buddhist stupas and statues in Tibet
Reports from the Dharamshala‑based Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) released on July 23, 2025, accuse Chinese authorities of destroying over 300 Buddhist stupas and a sacred statue in Drakgo County in Tibet’s Kham region. According to the CTA report cited by Hindustan Times, the demolitions occurred in late May or June 2025 near Lungrab Zang‑ri at Janggang Monastery (hindustantimes.com). Chinese forces allegedly razed hundreds of medium‑sized stupas and three larger structures, destroyed a newly built statue of Khenpo Jigme Phuntsok (founder of the Serthar Buddhist Institute) and a statue of Guru Padmasambhava (hindustantimes.com). The report states that the destruction has “left the local Tibetans and community deeply traumatised” (hindustantimes.com).
After the demolitions, authorities imposed a communications blackout and sealed off the area, threatening detention for anyone sharing information (hindustantimes.com). Officials justified the destruction by claiming that the stupas were built on state land and violated regulations. However, the CTA argues that this reflects a broader strategy of cultural erasure under Decree 22, issued by China’s National Religious Affairs Bureau, which tightens government control over monasteries, effective January 1, 2025 (hindustantimes.com). The report warns that the crackdown aligns with a campaign of “cultural genocide” designed to align Tibetan Buddhism with the Communist Party’s agenda (hindustantimes.com).
The destruction of religious monuments and restrictions on information constitute serious violations of freedom of religion or belief. International observers have previously criticised China’s policies in Tibet, but this incident underscores a rapid escalation since new regulations took effect. Human-rights advocates called on foreign governments to condemn the actions and support Tibetan Buddhists’ right to practice and preserve their heritage.
5. WEA report condemns Rwanda’s restrictive religious regulation
On July 23, 2025, the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) published a submission to the United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review evaluating Rwanda’s human‑rights record. The WEA argued that Rwanda’s 2018 law on Faith-Based Organizations and its 2025 amendment do not meet international human rights standards, noting that thousands of churches have been closed and stringent regulations imposed (christiandaily.com). The law requires churches to register with the state, pastors to hold theological degrees, and buildings to meet specific structural requirements; congregations had five years to comply (christiandaily.com). When the grace period expired, authorities inspected more than 13,000 places of worship and closed approximately 7,700 churches for non‑compliance (christiandaily.com).
The WEA submission observes that FBOs face more onerous standards than other NGOs—such as mandatory university degrees for pastors and parking-lot requirements—and that some regulations are impractical or exceed legitimate safety concerns (christiandaily.com). New rules introduced in March 2025 require pastors to complete 1,200 hours of training, pay a non‑refundable fee of about US$1,500 for legal recognition, and have at least 1,000 founding members (christiandaily.com). In June 2025, the Rwanda Governance Board issued guidelines requiring sermons to align with “Rwandan values” and prohibiting “misleading teachings,” further tightening government control (christiandaily.com). The WEA contends that these regulations interfere with religious autonomy and are not the least restrictive means of addressing fraud by rogue pastors, which is already a criminal offence (christiandaily.com).
The WEA report urges the Rwandan government to reconsider its legislation, allow sufficient time for compliance, and refrain from penalizing peaceful worshippers. It also highlights testimonies from church members who now gather secretly due to fear of arrest and note that the closures disproportionately affect Pentecostal churches (christiandaily.com). While Rwandan officials argue the regulations ensure safety and prevent exploitation, the closures have raised questions about freedom of religion and state interference in matters of faith.
Conclusion
The last month illustrates the diverse challenges facing religious freedom. In the United States, courts reaffirmed constitutional protections by upholding parents’ rights in education and blocking state intrusion into sacred confession, while in India, legislative plans threaten to link civil benefits to religious identity. In Asia and Africa, reports from Tibet and Rwanda show how governments continue to demolish sacred sites or regulate worship, drawing condemnation for violating international norms. Monitoring these developments is essential to understanding how religious liberty evolves across different cultural and legal contexts.
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.