老熟女午夜福利

KNOX COUNTY, Tenn. 鈥� Five taxpayers in Knox County, Tennessee, who support public education and church-state separation have been granted permission by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee to intervene in The Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville v. Knox County Board of Education. The court determined that these taxpayers, all parents of current or former Knox County public school students, had a legal right to participate in the lawsuit, which centers on the constitutionality of a religious public charter school attempting to open in Knox County. These taxpayers are now intervenor-defendants in the lawsuit. In response to their motion filed last week, the court ruled that the parent taxpayers 鈥渄emonstrated direct and concrete interests in: (1) preventing the potential unlawful use of taxpayer funds to establish religion and (2) ensuring that their children鈥檚 education is not diminished by the diversion of funds to religious schools.鈥� The court also noted the serious stakes of the case and the fact that no other party planned to defend the constitutionality of Tennessee law forbidding religious charter schools. The intervenors are represented by Education Law Center, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the 老熟女午夜福利, the 老熟女午夜福利 of Tennessee, Freedom From Religion Foundation, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the law firm Morrison Foerster pro bono. The counsel team issued the following statement: 鈥淭here is no question that Knox County taxpayers, including our clients, have a substantial interest in preventing their tax dollars from illegally funding a religious public school. Likewise, public school parents have a clear interest in preventing already-scarce funding from being diverted away from their children鈥檚 schools to pay for religious instruction. 鈥淲e are pleased that neither side opposed our clients鈥� participation in the Wilberforce Academy lawsuit, and that the court immediately recognized our clients鈥� right to assert a vigorous defense of the laws forbidding religious public education. 鈥淪omeone needs to stand up for the cherished and longstanding American principle of church-state separation and for the public schools that are the cornerstone of our democracy. We鈥檙e proud to represent these clients, who have stepped up to do just that.鈥�

ACLU, ACLU of Tennessee, and partners are representing six Knox County taxpayers dedicated to supporting public education and the separation of church and state who oppose Wilberforce Academy鈥檚 effort to force the county to authorize and fund it as a religious public charter school. The taxpayers, public school parents and faith and community leaders, object to their tax dollars funding a public charter school that will indoctrinate students into one religion, in violation of Tennessee and federal law and our nation鈥檚 longstanding commitment to the separation of church and state. They want to ensure that public schools remain secular and open to all.

KNOX COUNTY, Tenn. 鈥� Six Knox County taxpayers dedicated to supporting public education and the separation of church and state filed a鈥痬otion鈥痶oday in federal court seeking to intervene in a case about the constitutionality of a religious public charter school that is attempting to open in Knox County. The lawsuit, The Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville v. Knox County Board of Education, was filed in November 2025 by a religious organization that wants to run a public charter school鈥攆unded by taxpayers鈥攖hat, according to the school鈥檚 own complaint, would provide an 鈥渆xplicitly biblical and Christian education.鈥� The proposed intervenors are seeking to join the lawsuit on the side of the defendants, the Knox County Board of Education and its members. They oppose Wilberforce Academy鈥檚 effort to force the defendants to authorize and fund it as a religious public charter school. The proposed parties are public school parents and faith and community leaders who object to their tax dollars funding a public charter school that will indoctrinate students into one religion, in violation of Tennessee and federal law and our nation鈥檚 longstanding commitment to the separation of church and state. They want to ensure that public schools remain secular and open to all. 鈥淧ublic education is part of the common good. A religious charter school would be at odds with the need to ensure public schools remain appropriate for and welcoming to students of all faiths, families, and backgrounds,鈥� said proposed intervenor Amanda Collins, a retired school psychologist and parent of Knox County public school students. 鈥淎nd it would divert already limited public funds and scarce resources away from other public schools in Knox County. We can鈥檛 let this happen.鈥� The motion to intervene explains that charter schools are part of Knox County鈥檚鈥痯ublic education鈥痵ystem, and as such, cannot advance religious doctrine.鈥疞ike all public schools, charter schools must accept and serve all students and may not be run as religious schools. The proposed parties are asking the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee to allow them to participate in the case in order to safeguard these interests. 鈥淭he Reformed tradition in which I am formed has long supported the separation of church and state, believing that our faith, and all faiths, are best supported when they are free of undue state interference. This is why I object to the use of tax dollars to support religious education of any kind, including my own religion.鈥疪eligious education鈥痠s the job of churches, denominations, and private religious schools,鈥濃�痵aid the Rev. Dr. Richard Coble, another proposed intervenor, who is a pastor鈥痑t Westminster Presbyterian Church鈥痠n Knoxville and the parent of two Knox County public school students. The proposed parties are represented by Education Law Center, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the 老熟女午夜福利, the ACLU of Tennessee, Freedom From Religion Foundation, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the law firm Morrison Foerster pro bono. The motion to intervene is available here: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2026/01/2026-01-27-21-motion-to-intervene.pdf

NEW ORLEANS 鈥� The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, heard oral arguments in two cases challenging state laws in Louisiana and Texas that require public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom. The cases, Rev. Roake v. Brumley and Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District, raise fundamental questions about religious freedom and the separation of church and state guaranteed by the First Amendment. These arguments come nearly a year after a unanimous three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit ruled that Louisiana鈥檚 House Bill 71 is 鈥減lainly unconstitutional,鈥� finding it directly contradicted long-standing Supreme Court precedent. That decision was vacated when the full court agreed to rehear the case en banc. Federal courts in Texas have likewise issued multiple preliminary injunctions blocking enforcement of Senate Bill 10, concluding that the law violates students鈥� First Amendment rights by forcing government-endorsed religious scripture on public-school children. The plaintiffs in both states are multifaith and nonreligious families who simply want their constitutional right to decide their children鈥檚 religious education respected by the government. They want their children鈥檚 public schools to remain welcoming and inclusive for their families and students of all backgrounds. 鈥淚 send my children to public school to learn math, English, science, art, and so much more鈥攂ut not to be evangelized by the state into its chosen religion,鈥� said Rev. Jeff Sims (he/him) from Louisiana. 鈥淭hese religious displays send a message to my children and other students that people of some religious denominations are superior to others. This is religious favoritism and it鈥檚 not only dangerous, but runs counter to my Presbyterian values of inclusion and equality.鈥� 鈥淣o one faith should be canonized as more holy than others. Yet Texas legislators are imposing the Ten Commandments on public-school children,鈥� said Rabbi Mara Nathan (she/her) from Texas. 鈥淭hough they are a sacred text to me and many others, the Ten Commandments has no place on the walls of public-school classrooms. Children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools." The Louisiana plaintiffs in Roake v. Brumley are represented by the 老熟女午夜福利, ACLU of Louisiana, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. The Texas plaintiffs in Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District are represented by the 老熟女午夜福利, ACLU of Texas, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. 鈥淧ublic schools are meant to educate, not evangelize,鈥� said Daniel Mach (he/him), director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. 鈥淲hen the government mandates the display of a specific religious text in every classroom, it crosses a constitutional line by pressuring students and families to conform to the state鈥檚 preferred religious doctrine. The First Amendment protects the freedom of every family to decide matters of faith for themselves, and today鈥檚 arguments underscore why we must uphold that principle in our public schools.鈥� 鈥淲e are proud to be in front of the 5th Circuit representing Texas families who are challenging forced Ten Commandments displays in public school classrooms,鈥� said Sarah Corning (she/her), attorney at the ACLU of Texas. 鈥淪.B. 10 is a blatant violation of our First Amendment rights and sends students the message that they only belong if they follow the government鈥檚 chosen religion. Texas schools are not Sunday schools, and the Constitution protects Texans鈥� right to decide how or whether they practice their faith. Texas families want and deserve better from our public schools.鈥� 鈥淧ublic schools exist to educate, not indoctrinate,鈥� said Alanah Odoms (she/her), executive director of the ACLU of Louisiana. 鈥淭hey must remain spaces where all children are safe, free, and respected鈥攔egardless of their family鈥檚 beliefs. Religion is a personal choice, made by families, not something imposed by politicians through our public schools.鈥� 鈥淲e appreciate the Court鈥檚 time and its thoughtful engagement during today鈥檚 argument. This case centers on a fundamental constitutional principle: Families鈥攏ot the government鈥攎ust retain the right to decide whether and how their children engage with religion,鈥� said Jon Youngwood, Co-Chair of Simpson Thacher鈥檚 global Litigation Department. 鈥淭he laws at issue disrupt that longstanding protection, and we look to the court to safeguard these core First Amendment guarantees.鈥� 鈥淭he imposition of a particular religious teaching infringes the rights of students with minority beliefs and no belief,鈥� said Annie Laurie Gaylor (she/her), co-president at the Freedom From Religion Foundation. 鈥淭he Louisiana and Texas state governments cannot be allowed to ride roughshod over those who do not adhere to the dominant religion.鈥� 鈥淓very federal court that鈥檚 ruled in these cases so far has said the same thing: Requiring public schools to display a state-mandated version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom is unconstitutional. We urge the Fifth Circuit to affirm those rulings,鈥� said Rachel Laser (she/her), president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. 鈥淔amilies 鈥� not politicians or public-school officials 鈥� get to decide how, if and when their children engage with religion.鈥�