The Napa Legal Podcast

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week’s episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth cover three stories.

First, a Vermont law that allegedly shuts every religious school out of the state’s public tuition assistance program without ever mentioning religion. After the Supreme Court’s decision in Carson v. Makin barred states from excluding religious schools from generally available programs, Vermont rewrote its rules with new requirements on location, class size, and prior public funding. All 15 religious schools that had been eligible lost eligibility, while 45 secular private schools kept it. Second, Roger Lopez, a retired grandfather and longtime pro-life sidewalk counselor, is challenging a San Diego ordinance that creates eight-foot “bubble zones” around people near every health care facility, school, and place of worship in the city, while exempting clinic staff and escorts. Third, the Iowa Supreme Court’s rejection of a Dordt University nursing student’s religious exemption from a COVID-19 vaccine requirement.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro

0:21 Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast

1:00 This week’s stories

1:26 Vermont’s tuition assistance program

1:49 Carson v. Makin: religious schools can’t be excluded from generally available programs

2:41 Vermont’s new rules keep religious schools out without naming religion

3:08 The Bishop family sues

3:50 15 religious schools before the rewrite, zero after

4:22 The nondiscrimination workaround in St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy and Crosspoint Church v. Makin

5:27 What makes Vermont different: a “religious gerrymander”

5:58 The three requirements: location, prior public funding, and class size

7:15 Evidence of intent beyond the numbers

8:31 A state senator’s warning about “religious schools over the border”

9:21 ADF’s First and Fourteenth Amendment claims

10:41 Kyle: Vatican II, parents as primary educators, and distributive justice

12:07 San Diego’s sidewalk ordinance, a Thomas More Society case

13:05 What is a floating bubble zone?

13:25 The exemption for clinic staff and escorts

13:57 Roger Lopez and his decades of sidewalk counseling

14:54 The trial court dismisses the case under Hill v. Colorado

15:28 Argument one: “indicated” and “offensive noise” are too vague

16:54 Argument two: the ordinance is content-based even under Hill

17:39 Alleged hostility to pro-life views in the legislative history

18:14 Argument three: Hill v. Colorado as a “zombie precedent”

19:13 The Dobbs footnote and Justice Thomas in Coalition Life v. City of Carbondale

20:49 Scalia vs. Thomas on stare decisis

22:02 Frank: when overruling precedent is worth the disruption

23:15 Frank: why the Supreme Court should explicitly overrule Hill

23:26 Buffer zones and the First Amendment on public sidewalks

24:04 Laws against harassment already exist

24:35 Is the ordinance being selectively enforced against pro-life speech?

25:57 An Iowa nursing student’s COVID-19 vaccine exemption

27:19 “My body is a temple of God”

27:47 The Iowa Supreme Court affirms: the belief wasn’t sincere

29:12 Should vaping and binge drinking undermine a religious claim?

31:36 The twist: “I personally do not have a problem with the vaccine”

33:01 Smart lawyering: why the fetal cell line objection was stronger

35:28 Kyle: what the Vatican’s 2020 vaccine note actually said

36:37 Frank: you don’t need your church’s approval for a protected religious belief

38:03 Wrap-up

Lawyers: applications for the Good Counselor Project, Napa Legal’s fellowship for Christian attorneys, are open until December 1. Learn more at:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

The Napa Legal Podcast, November 3, 2026

#religiousliberty #freespeech #freedomofreligion #prolife #firstamendment

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this special episode, recorded at the Good Counselor Project capstone retreat, Frank DeVito sits down with John Bursch, Vice President for Appellate Advocacy at Alliance Defending Freedom, to preview what could be the biggest religious liberty term at the Supreme Court since 2022.

They cover three cases the Court has agreed to hear. In St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, Colorado excluded Catholic preschools from its universal preschool program because of their beliefs about human sexuality. In Daniel Grant’s case, an Ohio city told an Orthodox Jewish man he needed a zoning permit to host Sabbath prayer in his own home. And in International Partners for Ethical Care, the Ninth Circuit ruled that parents lacked standing to challenge a Washington law requiring youth shelters to help runaway minors obtain gender transition treatment in secret.

Frank and John also highlight cases still awaiting Supreme Court action, from the Olympus Spa case to a Washington wrestler forced to compete against a male opponent, and close with Union Gospel Mission of Yakima and the threat state employment laws pose to religious organizations that hire according to their faith.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro

0:52 Guest John Bursch of Alliance Defending Freedom

1:15 Watershed years: Kennedy v. Bremerton and Carson v. Makin

1:50 Why cultural conflicts end up at the Supreme Court, and religious liberty’s winning streak

2:45 St. Mary v. Roy: Colorado’s universal preschool program

3:58 Discrimination rules as a workaround to Carson v. Makin

5:18 The Court declines to revisit Employment Division v. Smith

6:59 The broad theory: applying the Carson line of cases

8:14 The narrow theory: secular exceptions under Tandon and Fulton

9:51 What exclusion means for Catholic families

10:39 Daniel Grant’s case: a permit to pray in your own home

13:03 The Williamson County ripeness doctrine in the Sixth Circuit

14:27 How local zoning laws burden people of faith

14:56 ADF and Orrick partner on the case

16:38 The Cleveland Browns comparison and man-on-the-street interviews

17:57 Lisa Blatt versus Josh Rosenkranz at oral argument

18:29 International Partners for Ethical Care: Washington’s shelter secrecy law

19:35 Mirabelli and the Ninth Circuit’s standing holding

22:01 Pending petitions: the Olympus Spa case

24:37 Obergefell and how language distorts the discrimination debate

26:33 Polk: a Virginia teacher, pronouns, and parental notice

28:13 Challenging Locke v. Davey

29:43 Perry: a vaccine exemption for a virtual school student

31:25 The Fourth Circuit’s first-of-its-kind holding on Tandon comparators

32:38 A Washington wrestler’s emergency application

35:06 Why combat sports make the stakes clearest

35:44 Minnesota softball and Connecticut track

37:11 Why the fight over women’s sports isn’t over in blue states

37:44 Union Gospel Mission of Yakima at the en banc Ninth Circuit

39:13 The ministerial exception versus the co-religionist doctrine

39:59 A messy en banc argument

40:55 Employment laws without religious exemptions: Washington, Michigan, and the Fourth Circuit

42:37 Why this matters for organizations like Napa Legal

44:04 Michigan’s law protecting abortion history in hiring

45:07 Wrap-up

Lawyers: applications for the Good Counselor Project, Napa Legal’s fellowship for Christian attorneys, are open until December 1.

Learn more at https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

The Napa Legal Podcast, October 27, 2026

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week’s episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth cover three stories. First, a surprising amicus brief from professors affiliated with the Notre Dame Religious Liberty Clinic. The brief supports the ACLU-led petition asking the Supreme Court to reverse the en banc Fifth Circuit’s decision in Nathan v. Alamo Heights, which upheld Texas’s law requiring the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom. Second, a Christian man who was escorted out of the Winter Haven Festival of Lights in Tucson, Arizona, and threatened with arrest for quietly asking attendees if they wanted to talk about Jesus. Police told him this counted as prohibited “sermonizing,” and he is now suing the city with First Liberty Institute. Third, a federal bankruptcy court’s rejection of the Diocese of Oakland’s reorganization plan, and the diocese’s novel argument that pressuring it to sell more churches to pay creditors raises a church autonomy problem.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro
1:24 The Texas Ten Commandments case, Nathan v. Alamo Heights
1:52 Judge Duncan’s en banc opinion and the hallmarks of a religious establishment
3:28 The case awaits a decision on Supreme Court review
3:38 A Notre Dame Religious Liberty Clinic brief backing the ACLU’s petition
4:19 A real split within the religious freedom movement
5:05 The brief’s claim: Texas forces religious instruction on a captive audience
7:04 Frank: the founders feared denominational dominance, not the Bible
8:29 Early American public schools, the King James Bible, and the Our Father
9:08 No coercion and no instruction: it’s a poster on the wall
10:13 Andrea Picciotti-Bayer: students don’t even have to look at it
10:52 Why Frank now hopes the Supreme Court takes the case
11:07 Kyle: the offended observer problem in new language
12:15 Stone v. Graham, the Lemon test, and psychology as a test for coercion
12:44 A Tucson holiday festival bans religious messaging
13:10 The festival sign and the barricaded “free expression zone”
13:38 Police: asking about Jesus is “sermonizing”
14:12 Hoffman sues, represented by First Liberty Institute and Gibson Dunn
14:42 Is a private festival on a city permit state action?
15:21 Is evangelizing protected speech? Kennedy v. Bremerton and Murdock v. Pennsylvania
16:19 Traditional public forum doctrine: intermediate scrutiny versus strict scrutiny
17:09 Why the festival’s rule is content-based
18:01 Crowd safety, pedestrian flow, and the heckler’s veto under Cohen v. California
19:22 Party bikes allowed, quiet conversations banned: why the rule isn’t narrowly tailored
20:24 Less restrictive alternatives the city could have used
21:08 Kyle: a winter holiday festival that banned Christ, and Paul in the marketplace in Acts 17
22:11 The myth of neutrality: treating the gospel like a sales pitch
23:21 Frank: lumping the most protected speech with the least protected speech
24:09 Private permits on public streets
25:22 An open invitation to lawyers who work on public forum issues
26:23 The Diocese of Oakland’s bankruptcy
27:52 Why the court rejected the reorganization plan
29:27 The diocese’s church autonomy argument
30:44 The court’s response
31:19 Frank: the court answered a free exercise question, not a church autonomy one
32:26 What if a court’s demands would leave Catholics without a parish?
33:38 Wrap-up

Lawyers: applications for the Good Counselor Project, Napa Legal’s fellowship for Christian attorneys, are open until December 1. Learn more at https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here:
https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:
https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

The Napa Legal Podcast, October 20, 2026

#religiousliberty #freespeech #freedomofreligion

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week’s episode, Frank DeVito is joined by Alexa Kowalewski, a recent graduate of Notre Dame Law School. They cover three stories. First, a North Carolina town that is using its zoning code to evict a small church from a rented event space where theaters, wedding venues, and bars are all permitted. Second, a lawsuit by two Christian student groups at Virginia State University, which stripped Christian organizations of their independent status, placed them under a single campus minister, and exempted Muslim and other non-Christian groups. Third, an update on California’s lawsuit against Heartbeat International, in which the state is seeking more than $20 million in penalties and a gag order that would bar pro-life pregnancy centers from even telling women about abortion pill reversal.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro

1:50 A North Carolina town tells a church to stop meeting

3:25 First Liberty responds to the demand letter

4:51 RLUIPA land use fights and the Missionaries of St. John the Baptist case

5:48 Why the ordinance isn’t neutral or generally applicable under Employment Division v. Smith

7:41 RLUIPA’s equal terms problem: only 2 of 14 zoning districts allow churches

8:35 Why local zoning fights must be fought early

9:55 Alexa: describe the same facts without the word “church”

12:41 Virginia State University’s new campus ministry policy

13:38 Christian groups lose their registered student organization status

15:34 The exemption for Muslim and non-Christian groups

17:01 The campus minister’s explanation and the end of Sunday church shuttles

18:08 Frank: campus ministries versus more orthodox outside groups

20:05 Establishment Clause or Free Exercise? Lemon, Kennedy, and the better claim

21:30 Heartbeat International and the Abortion Pill Rescue Network

23:22 New Beginnings: abortion pill reversal in rural Arkansas

25:46 California seeks $20 million and a gag order

27:07 How abortion pill reversal works

28:32 Why consumer protection law doesn’t fit nonprofits

29:28 Progesterone versus mifepristone safety

31:20 The chilling effect on pregnancy centers and the Thomas More Society’s defense

32:53 Alexa: the pro-choice movement’s limits on choice

34:42 Wrap-up

Lawyers: applications for the Good Counselor Project, Napa Legal’s fellowship for Christian attorneys, are open until December 1. Learn more at https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/th...

The Napa Legal Podcast, October 13, 2026

#religiousliberty #prolife #freedomofreligion

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss a North Carolina elementary school that refused to let Christian parents opt their children out of a music class taught by a male teacher who identifies as a woman; the Ninth Circuit's full-court rehearing of Union Gospel Mission of Yakima v. Brown, a case asking whether Christian ministries can require all employees, not just ministers, to share their faith; and the Supreme Court's decision to hear Missionaries of St. John the Baptist v. Frederick, a Kentucky case over a zoning board blocking a Marian grotto on church property, in which Napa Legal filed an amicus brief urging the Court to take the case.

Lawyers: applications for the Good Counselor Project, Napa Legal's fellowship for Christian attorneys, are open until December 1. Learn more at https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here:https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, October 6, 2026

#religiousliberty #parentalrights #freedomofreligion

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss Senator Josh Hawley's new Declaration for Life and his bill to ban the abortion pill mifepristone; a lawsuit by Catholic journalist Margot Cleveland accusing the city of Dearborn, Michigan, of favoring Islam over Christianity and Judaism; and oral arguments before the Indiana Supreme Court in Hoosier Jews for Choice, a case claiming that abortion is a protected religious exercise.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:26] Senator Hawley's Declaration for Life, unveiled at the inaugural Missouri Prayer Breakfast, and his Safeguarding Women from Chemical Abortion Act, which would ban the sale and shipment of mifepristone. Frank explains why the bill focuses on harm to women rather than harm to the unborn child.

[10:45] Cleveland v. City of Dearborn, in which a Dearborn resident alleges the city spent public funds on Ramadan banners and displays while ignoring her requests for comparable recognition of Christmas, Easter, and the Jewish High Holy Days. Kyle walks through the complaint's free speech retaliation and Establishment Clause claims.

[24:06] Hoosier Jews for Choice v. Indiana, in which Jewish, Muslim, and other plaintiffs argue that Indiana's abortion law violates their rights under the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Frank explains why the Indiana Supreme Court may decide the case on standing, and why neither the original meaning of "religion" nor strict scrutiny supports a religious right to end an unborn life.

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, September 29, 2026

#religiousliberty #freedomofreligion #prolife

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discussreligious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazarethdiscuss Bishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington's letter, read at every Mass inhis diocese, urging Catholics to vote no on Virginia's proposed abortion andmarriage amendments; a federal injunction protecting Cardinal Blase Cupich, theArchdiocese of Chicago, and two orders of Catholic sisters from Illinois'sassisted suicide referral mandate; and a Massachusetts case in which Catholicparents allege the state took custody of their 15-year-old daughter after theyrefused, on religious grounds, to affirm her as a boy.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:00] Bishop Burbidge's letter urging Catholics to vote noon two Virginia ballot amendments this November, one expanding abortion accessand one redefining marriage. Frank uses the letter as a chance to walk throughwhat Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

[13:06] Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm v.Pritzker, in which a federal judge temporarily barred Illinois from enforcingits End of Life Options Act against the Archdiocese of Chicago and the sisters.Kyle walks through the Becket Fund's church autonomy argument and the Catholicmoral theology at the heart of the complaint.

[30:18] The Massachusetts family who say the Department ofChildren and Families removed their daughter from their home two years agoafter a school counselor reported them for objecting to her social transition.Drawing on his experience as a solicitor for a children and youth agency, Frankexplains how Mirabelli v. Bonta, the Supreme Court's decision on secret schoolgender transitions, bears on the case.

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our websitehere: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, September 22, 2026

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty #parentalrights

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss a Washington State father who sued his son's school district after his fourth grader sat through a Pride Month lesson on gender reassignment surgery with no notice and no chance to opt out; the Becket Fund's amicus brief in Grand v. City of University Heights, the Supreme Court case of an Orthodox Jewish man told he could not gather ten men to pray in his own living room without a zoning permit; and the New Jersey Catholic Conference's guidance to Catholics following the state's sweeping new abortion law.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:05] A new lawsuit against the Lake Washington School District in Washington State. Frank explains why this case is one of the first real tests of Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court decision holding that parents are constitutionally entitled to notice and an opt-out when a curricular feature substantially interferes with the religious development of a child, and why the fight over whether a lesson is merely descriptive or actually normative is the wrong place for courts to draw the line.

[12:40] The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty's amicus brief in Grand v. City of University Heights, which the Supreme Court will hear this December. Kyle walks through Becket's argument that importing the finality rule from Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank, a Fifth Amendment takings case, into religious land use litigation hands local governments a playbook for postponing federal review indefinitely, and Becket's comparison of religious claimants trapped in zoning proceedings to the souls in Dante's Purgatory, only without the assurance of a happy ending.

[32:28] New Jersey's newly signed law expanding abortion access, which criminalizes interference with abortion and shields providers from losing their medical licenses or their malpractice insurance for performing what the statute calls reproductive health care. Frank and Kyle look at the New Jersey Catholic Conference's guidance on how Catholics should continue praying and offering literature outside abortion facilities.

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, September 15, 2026

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty #freeexercise

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this guest episode, Napa Legal's Senior Counsel Frank DeVito is joined by Clare Anne Ath, co-founder and president of Vita et Terra, a Catholic apostolate launched this year to advocate for care for creation. Join them for a discussion of three recent developments in state abortion law. Together they examine what these laws mean for parental consent, for sidewalk counselors and pro-life advocates, and for the free speech and free exercise protections that faith-based organizations depend on.

In this episode, we discuss:

0:00 Introduction

0:45 Clare's background and the launch of Vita et Terra

2:12 Why care for creation has been ceded to the political left

3:03 People as stewards, not problems

4:26 Building Catholic formation materials on creation care

5:09 Turning to the life issue

6:14 Massachusetts signs abortion without limits into law

6:33 "An Act Prioritizing Patient Access to Care" and the language of abortion policy

7:29 What third-trimester abortion actually involves

8:32 Why blue states are pushing further after Dobbs

9:45 Ten states and Washington, DC with no restrictions at all

10:31 Abortion pills in the mail and the Comstock Act

12:29 A Catholic governor and the question of scandal

13:03 Abolitionist and incrementalist approaches to ending abortion

16:17 Why the United States has no reliable abortion reporting data

17:58 Virginia's ballot amendment this November

18:34 How "every individual" would erase parental consent

20:18 A 17-year-old, a bus to New Jersey, and a call to her mother

22:41 Chemical abortion risks and what parents are not told

24:55 Abortion inside the Church

25:50 New Jersey criminalizes "interference" with abortion

26:36 The FACE Act and the prosecution of sidewalk counselors

29:28 Buffer zones, the First Amendment, and the comparison to the UK

33:29 Defunding Planned Parenthood

35:10 Conclusion

Learn more about Clare's work at https://www.vitaetterra.org/ and follow her on X at @clareanneath

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/th...

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss a new DOJ report showing that FBI work on the rescinded Richmond memo continued after headquarters ordered it stopped, including surveillance of two Catholic priests; Johnson v. Fleming, a petition asking the Supreme Court to revisit Locke v. Davey after Virginia denied tuition grants to Liberty University students whose degrees were deemed too religious; and a Minnesota county whose online-only permitting process left Amish residents facing fines and arrest warrants.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:45] The continuing saga of the FBI's 2023 Richmond memo, which tied traditionalist Catholics to violent extremism and pointed agents toward SPLC-designated "hate groups."

[16:05] Johnson v. Fleming, now on a petition to the Supreme Court. Two Liberty University undergraduates pursuing degrees in pastoral leadership and in music and worship challenge Virginia's tuition assistance grant program, which excludes religious training and theological education, while a master of divinity student headed for military chaplaincy challenges the National Guard's tuition program, which excludes theological degrees outright.

[33:45] A Minnesota county moved its zoning and permitting applications entirely online, leaving the Amish, who do not use the internet, with no way to apply, and then piled on civil fines, arrest warrants, and reportedly jail.

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, September 9, 2026

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty #freeexercise

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss an Idaho district court finding a narrow but fundamental Fourteenth Amendment right to abortion three years after Dobbs, Becket's new lawsuit against SUNY Broome Community College on behalf of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, and a Philadelphia school "quiet room" that allegedly became a Muslim prayer space where non-Muslim students were disciplined for entering.

In this episode, we discuss:

[2:18] Seyb v. Members of the Idaho Board of Medicine, now before the Ninth Circuit. Frank traces how the court gets there, from nineteenth-century mens rea requirements and life-of-the-mother exceptions to the claim that these show a fundamental limit on legislative power, and argues the leap is the whole error: a legislature declining to criminalize something is not a court recognizing a right it cannot touch.

[20:06] Becket sues SUNY Broome Community College after it denied recognition to an InterVarsity chapter over the chapter's requirement that student leaders share its Christian beliefs. Kyle works through the fourteen counts, including church autonomy and entanglement, the free exercise claims aimed at strict scrutiny, Tandon's most-favored-nation rule, and Fulton's holding that mere discretion defeats general applicability.

[35:35] Heister v. School District of Philadelphia, where a district judge partially denied the school district's motion to dismiss on August 21. Frank uses the case to raise a cultural asymmetry while cautioning against judgment when the facts are this contested, and Kyle asks whether the flag is a religious symbol at all.

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, September 1, 2026

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty #freeexercise

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss Texas adding scripture to its K–12 public school reading list, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court blocking statues of St. Michael and St. Florian from a Quincy public safety building, and a divided Ninth Circuit reviving a Wiccan inmate's claim over confiscated ritual items.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:09] Texas adds selections from scripture to its K–12 reading list alongside the classic literature, and Frank argues the law sits comfortably inside the Establishment Clause — that Mahmoud v. Taylor did not forbid assigning texts at all but turned on parental notice and the normative character of the material, that Abington v. Schempp expressly preserved the Bible's literary and historic value, and that the first public schools went considerably further than anything Texas is now attempting.

[11:33] The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court unanimously upholds an injunction against two ten-foot bronzes commissioned for Quincy's public safety building, applying a Lemon-derived state framework years after Kennedy v. Bremerton discarded it, and reaching the strange conclusion that the statues fail largely because they are new — turning American Legion, our most monument-friendly precedent, against them.

[26:05] A divided Ninth Circuit panel revives a Wiccan inmate's First Amendment and RLUIPA claims over a confiscated altar cloth and medallion the dissent notes cost twelve dollars each, which Frank uses to raise the question sitting underneath the case: whether courts can coherently protect the free exercise of religion without a workable definition of religion. Kyle answers from natural theology and the founders' laws of nature and of nature's God.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro

1:09 Texas adds scripture to the K–12 curriculum

1:39 Jonah, Job, and the Sermon on the Mount

2:10 The Ten Commandments law and Nathan v. Alamo Heights

2:56 Does Mahmoud v. Taylor apply?

3:26 Why the Mahmoud texts were different

4:15 Abington School District v. Schempp

4:59 The Bible's literary and historic qualities

6:14 The first public schools were explicitly Protestant

7:23 Neutral proceduralism vs. substantive goods

8:20 Not all ideas are equal

10:06 Kyle: what is education actually for?

11:33 Massachusetts: FitzMorris v. City of Quincy

12:31 Two bronzes, fifteen plaintiffs, three organizations

13:49 The SJC rules on August 20

14:18 Article 3 and Michael McConnell's brief

15:17 A state court applies Lemon after Kennedy

15:46 Colo v. Treasurer and Receiver General

17:42 Federal protection is a floor, not a ceiling

18:12 The free exercise ceiling and Masterpiece Cakeshop

19:09 The absurdity of the Lemon test

19:39 Becket's secular purpose argument

21:07 American Legion and the Bladensburg Cross

22:03 Too new to protect

23:35 Can a state court use an overruled federal test?

24:29 Picking and choosing religious symbols

26:05 Goff v. Rode in the Ninth Circuit

27:29 A 2–1 reversal of summary judgment

29:08 The dissent and the $12 replacement

30:38 Resolved on the wrong element

32:12 What is a religion?

32:49 Employment Division v. Smith

34:07 Madison and "the duty we owe our Creator"

35:25 Where Wicca would fall

36:28 Kyle: natural theology and the unmoved mover

37:56 Aquinas, Blackstone, and the American founding

39:41 Natural law theorists and originalists agree

40:39 "If anything's a religion, then nothing's a religion"

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, August 25, 2026

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty #establishmentclause

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss the Justice Department and an Orthodox synagogue suing Montgomery County, Maryland over its ban on carrying firearms near houses of worship, a new state-law challenge to Texas's Ten Commandments statute after the Establishment Clause arguments failed, and the Massachusetts law removing nearly every remaining limit on late-term abortion.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:07] Montgomery County bars firearms in or within 100 yards of a place of public assembly, including every house of worship in the county, and now faces parallel suits from the Justice Department on Second Amendment grounds and from an Orthodox synagogue arguing the ordinance is neither neutral nor generally applicable and burdens a religious obligation to provide for its own security.

[12:49] Three Houston-area mothers abandon the Establishment Clause theory that lost in the Fifth Circuit and challenge SB 10 under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the state's new Parental Rights Amendment, raising the question of whether a poster a child passively sees can count as religious coercion at all.

[26:08] Massachusetts eliminates its four-part framework governing abortion at or after 24 weeks, and Frank explains why the abortion pill rather than late-term surgical abortion is the real battlefield, while Kyle walks through Canon 915 and the excommunication question now being raised about a governor who calls herself Catholic.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro

1:07 Montgomery County's 100-yard gun ban

2:44 Two lawsuits: DOJ and an Orthodox synagogue

3:49 Bruen and the history and tradition test

5:59 The colonies that required men to bring guns to church

6:55 Not neutral, not generally applicable

8:30 What is the compelling interest, exactly?

10:58 Does disarming worshipers make churches safer?

12:49 Texas: Roth v. State of Texas

13:45 Judge Duncan's opinion in Nathan v. Alamo Heights

14:17 Six hallmarks of a founding-era establishment

15:04 Why Mahmoud v. Taylor does not apply

16:12 Three mothers and a new theory of the case

16:40 Texas RFRA and the Parental Rights Amendment

17:50 Lee v. Weisman and psychological coercion

19:22 The offended observer problem

20:47 What Dignitatis Humanae actually says about coercion

21:50 The TRO denial and the hearing set for today

23:23 Is a poster a substantial burden?

24:08 The parental rights argument

26:08 Massachusetts signs H.5595 into law

27:49 The bishops respond

28:55 Why the moderate position on abortion is illogical

30:17 The abortion pill is the real battlefield

31:51 Abolitionist in theory, incrementalist in reality

34:26 Fourteenth Amendment personhood and the risk of backlash

36:42 Kansas, Ohio, and what the referenda showed

37:41 Spiritual recourse and the 2002 Doctrinal Note

38:38 Canon 915 and the excommunication question

39:51 Why excommunication is pastoral, not political

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, August 18, 2026 #freedomofreligion #religiousliberty #secondamendment

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss Michigan's full-scale retreat from its ban on talk therapy for children with gender dysphoria, the Eleventh Circuit's en banc ruling upholding Florida's Protection of Children Act, and a second Oklahoma charter school case that may finish what St. Isidore started.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:44] Michigan agrees to a stipulated permanent injunction ending enforcement of HB 4616 against licensed counselors engaged in talk therapy, closing out a suit brought by a Catholic therapist and several branches of Catholic Charities after the Supreme Court decided Chiles v. Salazar.

[12:42] The Eleventh Circuit, sitting en banc, upholds Florida's Protection of Children Act, holding that obscenity sits outside the First Amendment entirely and that keeping minors out of obscene adult live performances is subject to rational basis review rather than strict scrutiny.

[24:42] A Jewish school foundation seeks charter status in Oklahoma on the same argument St. Isidore made, and Frank explains why Carson v. Makin points in one direction while the strings attached to state funding remain the harder question.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro

1:44 Michigan's talk therapy ban

2:30 The Catholic therapist who challenged it

4:14 The stipulated permanent injunction

5:16 Does a stipulation create precedent?

6:13 Why you should never lay down and give up

8:18 What if a state banned the other kind of therapy?

11:09 Do we trust this ruling class with that power?

12:42 The Eleventh Circuit upholds Florida's law

13:59 A Drag Queen Christmas in Pensacola

15:18 Hamburger Mary's facial challenge

16:55 Obscenity is outside the First Amendment

17:44 Rational basis, not strict scrutiny

18:49 Free speech in America was never unlimited

20:22 Philip Hamburger on natural rights and natural law

22:26 Originalism gets you to the same place

24:42 Oklahoma: St. Isidore round two

26:24 Why Oklahoma's charter schools are private

27:22 Carson v. Makin and generally available funding

28:48 Why St. Isidore ended 4–4

31:20 The strings attached to state money

32:25 St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website

here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcastThe Napa Legal Podcast, August 11, 2026

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty #freespeech

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss the Catholic lawsuit against New York's new physician assisted death mandate, the Ninth Circuit's unanimous ruling for a Kaiser Permanente employee fired over a religious vaccine exemption, and the first known workplace religious accommodation excusing an employee from using AI.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:20] Becket sues New York over the Medical Aid in Dying Act on behalf of four orders of religious sisters and the Diocese of Rockville Centre, challenging a law that requires objecting providers to counsel patients on assisted suicide, screen them for eligibility, and refer them out.

[18:11] The Ninth Circuit unanimously revives Mimi Weiss's Title VII claims against Kaiser, holding that notice of a religious conflict and sincerity of belief are separate questions, and that employers do not get to decide the second one.

[30:24] A Unitarian Universalist software engineer wins a religious exemption from her employer's AI mandate, and Kyle explains why Magnifica Humanitas does not say what the coverage claims it says.

Chapter markers

0:00 Intro

1:20 New York's assisted suicide mandate

3:58 Doctors must list the wrong cause of death

5:06 Carmelite Sisters v. James

7:25 Humanism without Christianity

11:12 The federal law arguments

13:04 Church autonomy and free exercise

16:07 The July 30 consent order

16:49 The lesson from Canada

18:11 Weiss v. The Permanente Medical Group

20:30 Notice or sincerity?

22:44 The Ninth Circuit rules for Weiss

26:42 How to write an exemption letter

30:24 A religious exemption from AI

32:02 What the AI encyclical actually says

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, August 4, 2026 #freedomofreligion #religiousliberty

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this special episode, Napa Legal's Senior Counsel Frank DeVito is joined by John Bursch, Senior Counsel and Vice President of Appellate Advocacy at Alliance Defending Freedom, former Solicitor General of Michigan, and a Napa Legal Good Counselor Project Fellow. John returns as the podcast's first repeat guest for a discussion of two fights that will shape what churches and religious nonprofits are free to say and free to do.

First, the litigation over the Johnson Amendment. John explains what pastors and priests can already say from the pulpit, why the government's theory rests on the Supreme Court's decision in Catholic Charities Bureau, and what happens next.

Second, Grand v. City of University Heights, which the Supreme Court agreed to hear on June 30. John explains the procedural question the justices will decide in December and why it matters for every American whose religious exercise runs into a zoning code.In this episode, we discuss:

0:00 Introduction

0:53 John Bursch's background and his work at Alliance Defending Freedom

1:55 What is the Johnson Amendment and why it matters

2:56 The 1950s origins of the Johnson Amendment

3:26 Is 501(c)(3) status a government benefit or a recognition?

4:27 Why no one has successfully challenged the Johnson Amendment until now

5:27 Obergefell, Verrilli, and the coming fight over tax exemption

6:30 The NRB case: plaintiffs, posture, and a change in administrations

7:30 The stipulated judgment and the district court's rejection

9:31 What the settlement signals to churches right now

10:01 What a priest can actually say from the pulpit

11:32 Two extremes: churches that go all in and churches that self-censor

12:34 The government's theory: unequal burdens on different denominations

13:34 The Catholic Charities Bureau problem

14:36 Applying Catholic Charities to the next generation of cases

15:09 The Anti-Injunction Act and the court's sua sponte dismissal

16:41 Why this is a speech case, not a tax case

17:42 Is the Anti-Injunction Act jurisdictional or waivable?

18:44 What's teed up for the Fifth Circuit and when to expect a decision

20:16 Why "boring" procedural doctrine decides religious liberty cases

21:16 Grand v. City of University Heights: a permit to pray at home

22:46 The cease-and-desist and the call with the mayor

23:16 The zoning hearing and the trap inside the permit

24:47 A pro se cert petition that got the Supreme Court's attention

27:20 Surveillance, spying neighbors, and a city that stopped picking up his trash

28:21 Williamson County, exhaustion, and Section 1983

29:53 What's next in the case

|30:23 Conclusion

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss Connecticut banning a Nativity display in the capitol building, the draft of the report released by the White House Religious Liberty Commission, and the continued legal battles of the Little Sisters of the Poor against the contraceptive mandate.

In this episode, we discuss:

[1:27] After Connecticut's Joint Committee on Legislative Management denied the Family Institute of Connecticut permission to place a small Nativity in the state Capitol under a policy that allows private displays unless they are "religious in nature," First Liberty Institute and the law firm Jones Day sent a demand letter arguing the exclusion is viewpoint discrimination under the Free Speech Clause and that the Establishment Clause — with Lemon v. Kurtzman's endorsement test abrogated by Kennedy v. Bremerton — plainly permits the display.

[13:16] The White House Religious Liberty Commission, created by President Trump's executive order and built on seven hearings, released a 224-page draft report surveying the state of religious freedom in America — from religion's role as an indispensable support for a free society to the history of the First Amendment from colonial establishments through the twentieth-century incorporation of the Establishment Clause against the states — and Kyle unpacks its twelve recommendations, including repealing the Johnson Amendment, restoring benefits for service members discharged over religious objections to the COVID-19 vaccine, and directing the DOJ to clarify the proper understanding of the Establishment Clause.

[29:53] The Little Sisters of the Poor are back before the Third Circuit — represented by Becket's Mark Rienzi and the firm Clement & Murphy, with oral argument heard July 7 — challenging a district court ruling that found the religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive mandate arbitrary and capricious, and arguing that even if that were so, striking the exemption would only leave the mandate itself violating RFRA by substantially burdening the Sisters' religious exercise, more than a decade and three Supreme Court victories into Pennsylvania and New Jersey's effort to strip away their protection.

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, July 21, 2026 #freedomofreligion #religiousliberty

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.In this guest episode, Napa Legal's Senior Counsel Frank DeVito is joined by Corrinne Vidales, Legal Counsel at the Ohio Christian Education Network and an alumna of Napa Legal's Good Counselor Project. Join them for a discussion of scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) and the new federal Education Freedom Tax Credit created by the One Big Beautiful Bill. With Treasury rules expected this fall, this program allows taxpayers to redirect up to $1,700 of their federal taxes to scholarship organizations, with major implications for Christian schools, faith-based nonprofits, and the families they serve.In this episode, we discuss:0:00 Introduction1:43 Corrinne's background and her work at the Ohio Christian Education Network3:37 What is a scholarship granting organization?4:51 How Ohio's dollar-for-dollar SGO tax credit works7:09 How scholarship money flows from donors to families9:37 Which states currently have SGO programs10:43 The federal Education Freedom Tax Credit and how it will work11:27 State opt-in: what happens if a governor refuses?14:05 Who's eligible for federal scholarships?15:19 How existing SGOs can qualify for the federal program16:21 Credit amounts, rollover, and stacking state and federal donations20:03 The greatest evangelism opportunity of our lifetime? What this means for the future of Christian education21:23 Launching new schools and taking the SGO model national23:53 ConclusionNapa Legal's introductory resource on SGOs, written by Corrinne, is available at https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here:https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits. In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Kyle Nazareth discuss an Eighth Circuit ruling reviving two Missouri counselors' challenge to local counseling censorship ordinances after the Supreme Court's decision in Chiles v. Salazar, a First Circuit ruling requiring Christian schools in Maine's school choice program to comply with the state's gender identity mandates in hiring and admissions, and the return of federal Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood after the One Big Beautiful Bill's one-year defund expired.In this episode, we discuss:[2:57] After the Supreme Court held in Chiles v. Salazar that conversations in counseling sessions are protected speech, the Eighth Circuit ordered a district court to reconsider claims brought by counselors Wyatt Bury and Pamela Eisenreich, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, challenging Kansas City and Jackson County ordinances that bar counselors from helping clients become comfortable with their biological sex.[12:40] The First Circuit ruled that Bangor Christian Schools, affiliated with Crosspoint Church and represented by First Liberty, may apply its religious beliefs when hiring teachers, but not where sexual orientation or gender identity is involved, effectively forcing the school to choose between its faith and participation in Maine's school choice program four years after Carson v. Makin.[30:10] Planned Parenthood regains Medicaid reimbursements for non-abortion services after the One Big Beautiful Bill's one-year funding pause expired, as pro-life advocates continue pushing for permanent defunding of abortion providers.For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here:https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcastThe Napa Legal Podcast, July 14, 2026#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty

Welcome to the Napa Legal Podcast, where we discuss religious liberty from the perspective of faith-based nonprofits.

In this week's episode, Frank DeVito and Alexa Kawlewski discuss:

1:30: A Catholic Charities serving the Lansing, Michigan area, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, files suit after the state abruptly revoked its participation in womens' services funding programs, allegedly out of hostility toward its beliefs on abortion and contraception.

15:05: A Montgomery County substitute teacher was denied a religious accommodation and removed from the classroom for refusing to use false pronouns and conceal students' social transitions from their parents. Her cert petition raises key questions under the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses, including a circuit split created by the Fourth Circuit.

27:00: The Supreme Court holds that Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause allow states to maintain girls' sports for biological girls, with notable concurrences from Justice Thomas and Justice Gorsuch worth reading.

Registration is still open for Napa Legal's annual Nonprofit Summit on July 22 in Napa, California, a one-day formation event for nonprofit leaders, board members, and professionals serving faith-based organizations. Learn more and register at: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/nonprofit-summit

For more about Napa Legal and our work, visit our website here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/

For more of the Napa Legal Podcast, visit our site here: https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

The Napa Legal Podcast, July 8, 2026

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty