SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
democracy forward
Faith Groups Sue Over Trump's Christian Nationalist 'Religious Liberty Commission'
"The Religious Liberty Commission isn't about protecting religious liberty for all; it's about rejecting our nation's religious diversity and prioritizing one narrow set of conservative 'Judeo-Christian' beliefs," said one critic.
Feb 09, 2026
"Religious freedom for some is religious freedom for none."
That's what Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush, president and CEO of Interfaith Alliance, said in a Monday statement as faith groups filed a federal lawsuit in the Southern District of New York over President Donald Trump's so-called Religious Liberty Commission.
Since Trump launched the commission last year, critics have warned that its true intent is to advance a Christian nationalist agenda. Brandeis Raushenbush, his alliance, Hindus for Human Rights, Muslims for Progressive Values, and the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund renewed that argument in the complaint, which names Trump, US Attorney General Pam Bondi, the Department of Justice, the commission, and its leader, Mary Margaret Bush, as defendants.
"The government has no right to pick and choose which religious beliefs to promote, and which to marginalize," said Brandeis Raushenbush. "The Trump administration has failed to uphold our country's proud religious freedom tradition, and we will hold them accountable. Today's lawsuit is our recommitment to fight for religious liberty for all with every tool available to us."
The complaint argues that "the composition and operations of the commission violate the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA)," which Congress enacted in 1972 "to curb the executive branch's reliance on superfluous, secretive, and biased 'advisory committees.'" Under the law, "every advisory committee must meet public transparency requirements, be in the public interest, be fairly balanced among competing points of view, and be structured to avoid inappropriate influence by special interests."
"While this body is ostensibly designed to defend 'religious liberty for all Americans' and celebrate 'religious pluralism' it actually represents only a single 'Judeo-Christian' viewpoint," the complaint states. "It held its first three meetings at the Museum of the Bible and has closed its meetings with a Christian prayer 'in Jesus' name.'"
"Only one of its members is not Christian, and the Christian members do not represent the full diversity of the Christian faith," the filing continues. "The commission's meetings have repeatedly referenced the belief that the United States was founded as a 'Judeo-Christian nation' and the membership reflects that viewpoint. All members of the commission advocate for increased religiosity, and specifically their brand of 'Judeo-Christian' religiosity, in public life."
"The commission's members have promoted the primacy of a Judeo-Christian worldview in the public sphere, advocated for discrimination against minority groups under the guise of 'religious liberty,' and otherwise supported policies that threaten religious freedom for all those who do not conform to their particular worldview," the document details.
Ria Chakrabarty, senior policy director of Hindus for Human Rights, said Monday that "by stacking this Religious Liberty Commission with a narrow set of voices and hiding the commission's work from the public eye, the Trump administration is evading the transparency and balance that federal law requires."
"Hindus for Human Rights is proud to stand with our multifaith partners to defend a pluralistic democracy where Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, and nonreligious people all belong as equals," she added.
A commission that claims “religious liberty” while excluding Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs—and nonreligious Americans—isn’t protecting freedom. It’s narrowing it.We’re challenging this commission in court. democracyforward.org/news/press-r...
[image or embed]
— Hindus For Human Rights (@hfhr.bsky.social) February 9, 2026 at 10:21 AM
Ani Zonneveld, president and founder of Muslims for Progressive Values, noted that "as a Muslim American organization, we have seen firsthand how elevating a singular religion above others, especially in a country as religiously diverse as the United States, leads to the oppression and possible persecution of minority faiths."
The plaintiffs are represented by Democracy Forward, which has filed over 150 lawsuits against the Trump administration since the president returned to power last year, and the decades-old Americans United for Separation of Church and State—whose president and CEO, Rachel Laser, stressed that "the Religious Liberty Commission isn't about protecting religious liberty for all; it's about rejecting our nation's religious diversity and prioritizing one narrow set of conservative 'Judeo-Christian' beliefs."
Blasting the commission's public meetings as "a vivid example of this favoritism," Laser added that its "true purpose and operations can't be squared with America's constitutional promise of church-state separation."
Specifically, Laser's group and other advocates of church-state separation have long pointed to the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which bars government from making any "law respecting an establishment of religion."
"Since the nation's founding, the values of religious liberty and pluralism have been central to the American identity. These values are now under accelerated attack," declared Perryman, who's also on the Interfaith Alliance board. "The fatally flawed way this commission was assembled makes clear that the outcome isn't just un-American, it's against the law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ex-Officials, Watchdogs Rip Trump Effort to 'Bully' IRS Into Giving Him $10 Billion in Taxpayer Dollars
"Our government should be accountable to the people, not the whims of a power-hungry executive," said one Common Cause campaigner.
Feb 05, 2026
Less than a week after a court filing revealed that President Donald Trump is suing his own Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service for $10 billion over the leak of his tax returns during his first term, former federal officials and watchdog groups on Thursday called out his attempt to abuse "powerful tools for holding government accountable."
The legal group Democracy Forward filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Common Cause, the Project On Government Oversight, ex-IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, former National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson, and Kathryn Keneally and Gilbert Rothenberg, who both held leadership roles in the US Department of Justice's Tax Division.
"This case is extraordinary because the president controls both sides of the litigation, which raises the prospect of collusive litigation tactics," states the amicus brief. "Collusive litigation threatens the integrity of the judicial process by risking the court's entanglement in an illegitimate proceeding. And although the complaint has significant defects—it was filed too late, against the wrong party, and for an unsupported and excessive sum of damages—the conflicts of interest make it uncertain whether the Department of Justice will zealously defend the public fisc in the same way that it has against other plaintiffs claiming damages for related events."
"To maintain the integrity of the judicial process in the face of these highly irregular circumstances, the court should consider exercising its inherent judicial authority to proactively manage this case from the outset," argued the former officials and groups, known as amici. Specifically, they said:
- First, the court should consider issuing an order for the parties: to show cause why this court has jurisdiction over this case, to explain how they will address the fundamental conflict-of-interest problems with this case, to show why this case should not be stayed until after President Trump leaves office, and to show why the unjustified $10 billion damage figure should not be stricken from the pleadings;
- Second, the court should consider appointing amici who have expertise on issues of tax law and separation-of-powers issues to present fulsome legal arguments on all future issues that arise in this case; and
- Third, the court should consider allowing participation of those amici in hearings.
"To treat this case like business as usual," the coalition declared, "would threaten the integrity of the justice system and the important taxpayer and privacy protections at the heart of this case."
In a statement about the new filing in the Southern District of Florida, Abigail Bellows, Common Cause's senior policy director for anti-corruption and accountability, stressed that "we are watching a president attempt to bully the IRS into giving him billions of our taxpayer dollars."
"Our government should be accountable to the people, not the whims of a power-hungry executive," Bellows said. "We urge the court to take steps to promote judicial integrity and protect the public interest."
President Trump has made $4 billion since his second inauguration. And now, he's suing the Treasury Department and IRS for $10 billion more in "damages."So we're filing a brief urging the court to reject President Trump’s scheme and protect taxpayers.
[image or embed]
— Democracy Forward (@democracyforward.org) February 5, 2026 at 5:37 PM
In addition to representing the amici in this case, Democracy Forward has launched various other lawsuits against Trump and his administration, which have faced sweeping allegations of corruption since the president returned to power a year ago.
According to an analysis published by the New York Times editorial board last month, on the one-year anniversary of his second inauguration, Trump and his family enriched themselves to the tune of at least $1.4 billion during the first year of his second term—largely through investment in cryptocurrencies, though he's also secured settlements from tech and media companies.
Various other members of the second Trump administration have also been accused of corruption and conflicts of interest, and as the Times separately revealed in December, many rich and powerful contributors to Trump's post-election fundraising haul have received corporate-friendly regulatory changes, dropped enforcement cases, government contracts, and even pardons.
"The president's corruption continues, this time in an attempt to take $10 billion dollars of the taxpayers' money, which threatens to make a mockery out of our justice system," said Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman. "Not only does the president's baseless case have significant legal defects, but there are colossal conflicts of interest at play."
"We thank these experts for raising these serious concerns about how President Trump is seeking to further illegally line his own pockets at the public’s expense and our brief urges the court to exercise its power to ensure the matter is not one-sided."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Project 2025-Backed Trump Rule Guts Protections for 50,000 Federal Workers
“This rule is a direct assault on a professional, nonpartisan, merit-based civil service and the government services the American people rely on every day," said one critic.
Feb 05, 2026
The Trump administration on Thursday finalized a major civil service rule change that makes it easier to fire certain federal employees and replace them with political loyalists—a move that critics say increases the likelihood of abuse of power.
The new policy at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)—the federal government's independent central human resources agency—reclassifies tens of thousands of federal workers as "policy/career," making them effectively at-will employees and easier to terminate.
The policy, known as Schedule F, was first proposed by President Donald Trump during his first term, which expired before he could fully implement it. Former President Joe Biden rescinded the policy, but Trump revived it on his first day back in office in January 2025, despite warnings from experts who say it is illegal.
Schedule F is one of the policies recommended in Project 2025, the far-right initiative to boost the power of the presidency and purge the federal civil service.
OPM estimates that around 2% of the federal workforce, or approximately 50,000 employees, will be affected by the rule change, which the agency said is aimed at "strengthening accountability, improving performance, and reinforcing a merit-based federal workforce."
Scott Kupor, who heads the OPM, said in a statement that the rule change “restores a basic principle of democratic governance: Those entrusted with shaping and executing policy must be accountable for results.”
“This rule preserves merit-based hiring, veterans’ preference, and whistle-blower protections while ensuring senior career officials responsible for advancing President Trump’s agenda can be held to the same performance expectations that exist throughout much of the American work force," he added.
However, critics are sounding the alarm over parts of the new policy, including a provision allowing agencies to fire employees who "obstruct the democratic process by intentionally subverting presidential directives."
“This rule is a direct assault on a professional, nonpartisan, merit-based civil service and the government services the American people rely on every day,” American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) national president Everett Kelley said in a statement.
“When people see turmoil and controversy in Washington, they don’t ask for more politics in government, they ask for competence and professionalism," Kelley continued. "OPM is doing the opposite. They’re rebranding career public servants as ‘policy’ employees, silencing whistleblowers, and replacing competent professionals with political flunkies without any neutral, independent protections against politicization and arbitrary abuse of power.”
“A professional civil service means nurses and doctors can advocate for patient safety, inspectors can report violations, cybersecurity experts can warn about threats, and benefits specialists can tell the truth about what it takes to deliver services—without worrying they’ll be punished for it,” Kelley argued.
“Turning tens or maybe hundreds thousands of these professionals into at-will employees doesn’t make government more accountable," he added. "It makes it more vulnerable to pressure, retaliation, and political interference, which is exactly the opposite of what the public is asking for right now.”
Democracy Forward, which represents AFGE and another public sector union in a lawsuit challenging Trump's revival of Schedule F, said in a statement Thursday, "The final rule continues to weaken more than a century of bipartisan civil service protections by allowing the administration to remove experienced, nonpolitical federal employees at will while stripping away civil service protections, meaningful oversight, and appeal rights."
"Existing law already provides mechanisms to address employee misconduct," the group added. "This rule is not about accountability, but about politicization."
The Trump-Vance admin is choosing to ignore countless concerns from the American public in order to implement a cornerstone of Project 2025 – an unlawful effort to weaken and politicize the nonpartisan civil service through regulation. To that we say: we will see you in court.
[image or embed]
— Democracy Forward (@democracyforward.org) February 5, 2026 at 7:06 AM
Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said that "this proposal was wrong when it was outlined in Project 2025, wrong when the president issued an executive order, and it remains wrong now... This is a deliberate attempt to do through regulation what the law does not allow—strip public servants of their rights and make it easier to fire them for political reasons and harm the American people through doing so."
"We have successfully fought this kind of power grab before, and we will fight this again," Perryman vowed. "We will return to court to stop this unlawful rule and will use every legal tool available to hold this administration accountable to the people.”
On the legislative front, US Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and the late Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-Va.) last year reintroduced the Save the Civil Service Act, which aims "to protect the federal workforce from politicization and political manipulation."
“The civil servants who make up our federal workforce are the engine that keeps our federal government running,” Connolly, who died last May of cancer, said at the time. “They are our country’s greatest asset. We rely on their experience and expertise to provide every basic government service—from delivering the mail to helping families in the wake of natural disasters."
Connolly added that Trump's push to "remove qualified experts and replace them with political loyalists is a direct threat to our national security and our government’s ability to function the way the American people expect it to."
"It threatens to create a system wherein benefits and services are delivered based on the politics, not the needs, of the recipient," he added. "Expertise, not political fealty, must define our civil service.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular