American Crusade: How the Supreme Court Is Weaponizing Religious Freedom

by Andrew L. Seidel, Erwin Chemerinsky (Foreword)

Is a fight against equality and for privilege a fight for religious supremacy? A constitutional attorney dives into the debate on religious liberty, the modern attempt to weaponize religious freedom, and the Supreme Court's role in that “crusade.”
Critically acclaimed author and constitutional attorney Andrew L. Seidel looks at some of the key Supreme Court cases of the last thirty years—including Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (a bakery can deny making a wedding cake for a gay couple), Trump v. Hawaii (the anti-Muslim travel ban case), American Legion v. American Humanist Association (related to a group maintaining a 40-foot Christian cross on government-owned land), and Tandon v. Newsom (a Santa Clara Bible group exempted from Covid health restrictions)—and how a hallowed legal protection, freedom of religion, has been turned into a tool to advance privilege and impose religion on others. The book will include a foreword by noted constitutional scholar Erwin Chemerinsky.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, Religion, Legal, Law, Audiobook

320 pages, Hardcover

First published September 27, 2022

About the author

Andrew L. Seidel is a constitutional attorney, the Director of Strategic Response at the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and an author. Andrew graduated cum laude from Tulane University ('04) with a B.S. in neuroscience and environmental science and magna cum laude from Tulane University Law School ('09), where he was awarded the Haber J. McCarthy Award for excellence in environmental law. He studied human rights and international law at the University of Amsterdam and traveled the world on Semester at Sea. Andrew completed his Master of Laws at Denver University Sturm College of Law with a perfect GPA ('11) and was awarded the Outstanding L.L.M. Award.

abridged from the Freedom From Religion website

Reviews

[J Earl · Rating 5 out of 5]

American Crusade: How the Supreme Court Is Weaponizing Religious Freedom by Andrew L Seidel is a clear and concise analysis of the ways that the extreme religious right wing has twisted the Constitution in order to maintain their undeserved entitlements, privileges, and (faux)supremacy.

While it would be wonderful if everyone read this with an open mind, those who know quite well that what they are doing is un-American will just pretend that they are doing what is "right." It would be great if those who have been supporting the right without fully realizing what has been happening (part of being privileged is being blind to what is happening to others while you exercise your entitlements) read this and had to actually make the decision to either stop the un-American activity or admit they are, indeed, anti-democracy and pro religious persecution of every religious belief other than their own. For those of us aware of the evil these people represent, this book makes explicit the areas where rule of law has been either ignored or completely flipped in order to serve the crusade for an anti-humanity pro-(right kind of)Christian regime.

While one of the things this book does is offer us specific talking points for debating those who are actually open to discussion, the bigger thing, for me, is as a call to action before it is too late. We must stop the twisting of our system and mend the holes that have always needed mending and have now been used to shred our democracy and the rule of law. If we can't make those changes internally, then, by any means necessary, we must stop each and every one of these people from doing more damage. They are a minority, but they also control, or are controlled by, the most money. So we MUST do whatever it takes to make sure they are stopped, permanently, without recourse to any more of their hate filled faux Christianity.

Highly recommended for those who support democracy and rule of law. Also recommended for those on the religious right, but be aware, there are big words in here that will likely confuse you.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.

[Boats Brock]

As always Andrew constructs a reasoned and factual case demonstrating the damage being done to our country's foundational principles by the Christian nationalist movement. Unfortunately, those most in need of hearing the message won't receive it, instead opting to leave 1-star reviews without having actually read the book.

[Authentikate · Rating 5 out of 5]

What does “religious freedom” mean? Does it mean—as the First Amendment intended—freedom of citizens to chose and practice any religion (or no religion) so long as it doesn’t interfere with someone else’s right to their free exercise of or from religion? Or does it mean that one religion has super-first amendment rights? That one preferred religion is supreme and above (quite literally) the law that binds everyone else?

Andrew Seidel, a lawyer who has written briefs (amicus) to the Supreme Court, explains in lay terms what is happening in a raft of recent court cases (and some historical cases): the Christian conservative right is mounting (quite successfully) a crusade to elevate Christianity above all other religions and to remove it to a level that is above the law.

Seidel explains some important cases that the crusaders have mounted including: Masterpiece Cake Shop; Hobby Lobby; Santeria; school voucher programs and eludes to many more (Roe; public government displays of crosses etc). He carefully explains each case, how it was used to further the crusade, who are the crusaders, how are the crusaders linked (here it’s no surprise to many that Alito, Roberts, Coney-Barrett, Kavanaugh are all tightly linked to the crusade directly and to other crusaders) and how the law and the constitution are being warped to benefit one religion over all others.
—-
Should taxpayer monies be used to fund a playground attached to a satanic temple? Is this constitutional? Would you want to be forced to fund this?

Should Christians be forced to contribute tax dollars so that Muslim families may send their children to private schools teaching Islam? Would it be constitutional?

Can a government clerk tasked with issuing fishing licenses be able to refuse issuance of such licenses because she feels fishing is against her deeply held religious beliefs? Again…is this right under our constitution?

Here I’ve twisted a few examples to clearly make the point Seidel makes in this book: if the answer above is NO (and it is) it should remain NO when the tax money is fixing a playground attached to a private Christian school playground; when tax payers are forced (because they can’t opt out) to support sending kids to private Christian schools (even if they’re LGBTQ and said school directly discriminates against them), or when the government clerk is refusing a marriage license to members of the LGBTQ community.

This book explains how the Supreme Court is weaponizing “religious freedom” to favor Christianity at the expense of non-Christians rights.
—-
The constitution is supposed to work (equally) for all people. It isn’t suppose to bend and twist and contort to favor one group over all others.

The hypocrisy of the crusade is astounding but becoming less and less surprising. The goal is to elevate Christianity and more specifically, Christians, above every other citizen demographic. A favored class of people. A ruling caste.

The book is well argued and thoroughly cited.

If you’ve not read his other work, The Founding Myth, I highly recommend it. There, Seidel explained Christian Nationalism and the two (Christian Nationalism and the crusade) are tightly linked.

[Vic Allen · Rating 4 out of 5]

American Crusade covers several Supreme Court cases the author uses to build his case that the Court is actively seeking to make "religious freedom" supreme to all other rights. In other words, Christian Nationalism. He has built a good case.
White Christian Nationalism is a major threat to our Constitution. American Crusade lays out specific instances where courts have ruled in favor of WCN activists in direct contradiction of the the Constitution. And lays out the dangers the success of "freedom of religion" cases pose for all who are not White, conservative, Christians.
Not a fun read but a necessary one.

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

Meticulous and fact-laden, yet propelled by righteous polemic against the Christianization of our courts. Not an easy read, but rewarding.

[Ann Herrold · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super important information. I did enjoy his first book more but this was just as important.

[Captain DadPool · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have read this book twice now and have made many highlights and taken many notes in the margins. It is one of the most eye-opening books that I have ever read. As someone with no legal training myself, I can honestly say that Andrew avoids legal jargon and writes in a way that is easy for the common reader to understand. Not only is this book inspiring and informative, it is vitally important for understanding how we got here as a democracy, and what the future may hold for us if we don't fight back. I cannot recommend this book enough.

[Rich Jagoddamnzinski · Rating 5 out of 5]

After reading the founding Myth, and following along with what is going on. Having this pre ordered, I already know this will be excellent and something everyone who cares about democracy should read.

[Jeremy M. Gustafson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Seidel once again lays out a well-reasoned, well-supported, and convincing argument. While, I didn’t find this case to be as ‘airtight’ as his case in “The Founding Myth,” it is still as convincing as it is troubling. The only issue I had was some slight digressions into a genetic fallacy; the assumption that because a current organization was nefariously founded it must, therefore, still be nefarious. He does give evidence to support the continuing nefariousness of said organizations, but relies on an assumption of motives, which can’t be ‘known.’ This does not detract from the overall validity of his case. He still makes sound arguments and this book is a must read!
This book is a wake up call to everyone that we need to better understand the country and the Constitution. We need to exercise ALL our rights and ensure their continuity by acting in the best interest of everyone’s equal protection under the law. We can do this by writing our Congressman about adding Supreme Court Justice seats and voting with this in mind. There is a dark corner of American Conservatives where the proverbial wolves in sheep’s clothing are preying on the piously naive to push an agenda of supremacy; which is about as antithetical to our Constitution as you can get. It seems the conservative’s accusations towards liberals about activist judges, lobby interests, and government take over were really thinly veiled confessions and projections meant to keep the focus so as to pull off a Supreme Court heist!

[Richard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Andrew L. Seidel had big shoes to fill following his excellent debut book, The Founding Myth. Seidel masterfully knocked it out of the park, again, with his second book, American Crusade.
If christians weren't so anti-science, medical knowledge would have advanced to the point where Christopher Hitchens might still be alive and I think he would have liked this book.
This was easily the most readable, thoroughly referenced, book I have ever read!
-
Side Note: I'm hoping to have Seidel autograph this book when I see him in October at the FFrF convention.

[Melissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received this book from NetGalley to read and review.

Timely and informative, I loved reading it. Ends right before the fall of Roe. Every liberal should read this. As this is an ARC copy there were errors. Also, I think the notes should have been at the bottom of the page rather than at the end. Recommended reading.

[Jessie Lampert · Rating 5 out of 5]

A forever enduring fight it seems my friends! The pain you feel while reading is real. You must spread the pages of this book and caress the pages in an ever-loving fashion because Andrew has real passion for what he writes about. Do not be shocked if you feel tense while you read; you should be! You should feel adrenaline rushing, heart rate increasing, temperature rising. The book for what is tying us down in the legal world in the Supreme Court is terrifying and will make you realize what recent history occurred to lead us to now and what soon will come. This is a must for EVERYONE. Get one for yourself and one for a friend…you know…that one friend. Thank you, Andrew, for always keeping us coming to you for reality.

[Nate Ufford · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well written and dreadfully enlightening about the current plight of our rights as Americans.

[Ryan Boissonneault · Rating 5 out of 5]

The United States Constitution, you may be surprised to learn, mentions religion only twice: Once, in Article VI, where it states that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States,” and again, in the First Amendment, where it states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” That’s it; you’ve now just read everything there is to read about religion in the nation’s most significant founding document.

This turns out to be an awkward revelation for the Christian nationalist; if the founders were, as Christian nationalists maintain, creating a “Christian nation,” it is quite odd that the words God, Jesus, Christianity, and the like are entirely absent from the “supreme law of the land,” and that religion is only mentioned twice and in an entirely negative sense. Clearly, the US was established as a religiously neutral secular government—the first of its kind in the history of the world.

Frankly, I’m not sure how the founders could have been any clearer in their intentions without literally writing the words “THE US IS NOT A CHRISTIAN COUNTRY.” Of course, some of the founders actually did write these words in the Treaty of Tripoli, which in 1797 was signed by President John Adams with the unanimous consent of the US Senate, and which says that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”

We can keep going. While Thomas Jefferson’s exhortation for a “wall of separation” between church and state is well-known, what may be less well-known is that James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights and father of the Constitution, was equally vociferous against the idea of mixing religion with government. On the issue of congressional chaplains, for example, Madison wrote, in the Detached Memoranda, “the establishment of the chaplainship to Congs is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles.” He noted that minority religions would likely never achieve chaplainship, and, therefore, that the promotion of one religion above all others using government resources was a clear violation of constitutional principles—principles, keep in mind, that he would be very familiar with on account of the fact that he drafted them.

Further, note that the Constitution opens with the words “We the people,” which is a direct philosophical declaration that the government draws its power from the consent of the governed, not from a deity. Additionally, the idea that all persons are created equal, embodied in the Declaration of Independence, is fundamentally at odds with the idea of Christian supremacy. As one Supreme Court decision put it (before it was overtaken by conservative Christians), “A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some.”

Therefore, under no reasonable interpretation of the founding documents—not even and especially under the flawed, conservative interpretive scheme of originalism—can we possibly conclude that the country was founded as a “Chrisitan nation.”

And yet that is exactly what the Supreme Court is attempting to turn the nation into, as constitutional attorney Andrew Seidel masterfully explains in his latest book, American Crusade: How the Supreme Court Is Weaponizing Religious Freedom. By analyzing several key Supreme Court cases over the last thirty years, Seidel shows us how these cases are being increasingly decided against the principles and sentiments of the founders—and against our best interests as a country.

There is no doubt that there can be an inherent tension between the freedom to practice one’s religion and the obligation to adhere to the country’s secular laws, especially when the two directly conflict. In these more tricky situations, which principle should take precedence? Religious freedom or general adherence to the law?

It turns out that this question is not as complicated as one might imagine. In the third chapter of the book, Seidel provides a simple interpretive framework we can use when thinking about religious freedom cases, a framework that requires that we draw three lines, as follows:

Line # 1: Action versus belief - This line ensures that no government body can legislate your thoughts, and if they attempt to do so, it is clearly unconstitutional. The First Amendment grants you the unlimited right to think or believe anything you’d like; you can believe in one god, one hundred gods, no gods, or the flying spaghetti monster for all the government should care, with one caveat—that your beliefs don’t materialize into actions that harm others. Which brings us to line # 2.

Line # 2: The rights of others - The First Amendment guarantees your freedom to think whatever you’d like (an unlimited right) along with the freedom to act on those beliefs (a limited right), granted you don’t infringe on the rights of others. As Seidel wrote, “Your right to swing your religion ends where the rights of others begin.” For instance, and as an extreme example, you’re allowed to think that your God has commanded you to sacrifice your child (as he did with Isaac), but you are unequivocally not allowed to actually carry out the sacrifice. The right of your child to be free from harm and your obligation to adhere to the same criminal laws as everyone else supersedes your religious freedom. This is how it has to be. If this were not the case, religion could be used to justify any action and circumvent any law.

Line # 3: State and church - This third line ensures that government officials do not use the inherent power of their position or government resources to promote or spread their particular religion. This should be obvious; we live in a pluralistic country with a variety of religions, and while Christianity is the most prominent, the First Amendment was not created to protect Christian supremacy—it was created to protect religious minorities.

To illustrate these principles in action, let’s briefly consider the infamous case of Kim Davis, the county clerk in Kentucky who refused to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples based on her religious convictions (Seidel covers this in much greater detail in the book).

Davis was brought to court for her refusal to perform her legal duty and issue legitimate and lawful marriage licenses. After due consideration, the court ultimately ruled that Davis must in fact issue the licenses, despite her religious convictions. The question, of course, is this: Did the court infringe on her constitutional rights to religious freedom?

As Seidel explains, the answer is an unequivocal “no,” which can be clearly seen based on the three lines we described above:

1. Actions versus beliefs. The court did not order Davis to change her beliefs; she is free to personally remain a bigot, free to personally refrain from marrying an individual of the same sex, and free to quit her government position if she doesn’t agree with the secular and neutral marriage laws that apply equally to everyone.

2. The rights of others. The court appropriately noted that the right for Davis to practice her religion ends where it infringes on the general legal rights of others; in other words, the rights of same-sex couples to marry. To see how obvious this is, assume, hypothetically, that the couples Davis refused to license were black. If Davis were to deny marriage licenses to couples on account of their color, who would dare defend this action, even if she cited her religious convictions? And if you believe that she has no legitimate grounds to deny black couples a marriage license, then the burden is on you to show how discriminaiton against homosexuals is any different than discrimination against people of color.

3. State and church - In this particular case, Davis was using her position of power in the government to deny the rights of others based solely and exclusively on her very specific religious beliefs. This is clearly unconstitutional, and for good reason, as we’ve stated above. But keep in mind that this doesn’t even address the fact that her argument may fail even on her own terms, as certain Christian churches would claim that their religion would have no issue with same-sex marriage in the first place. But either way, you can see why we would want to avoid creating a situation where bigotry and the circumvention of the law can be justified based on esoteric personal interpretations of ancient texts.

This all seems a lot simpler than these cases are typically made out to be, but, unfortunately—based on the current composition of the Supreme Court—it’s not unlikely that the court would now rule in Davis’s favor. It essentially did so in the case of Jack Phillips, who infamously refused to provide a wedding cake for a same-sex couple on the grounds of “religious freedom.” Cases like these are always the same story; bigotry justified by religion. The only difference is that, now, the Supreme Court is accepting that justification.

What Seidel so brilliantly demonstrates in this book is that, to the Supreme Court, “religious freedom” is coming to increasingly mean “Christian privilege.” As Michael Farris said, “The test of religious freedom is whether you’re willing to stand up for the religious freedom of those that you disagree with theologically.” In that regard, the Supreme Court unequivocally fails, as it has repeatedly sided with Christians while failing to protect the rights of others, including Muslims (see Trump’s Muslim travel ban).

As an example, consider the case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, where the court ruled that, essentially, for-profit corporations can circumvent federal regulations—in this case, the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate—if its owners object to those regulations on religious grounds. Even ignoring the questionable idea that corporations can have religious beliefs to begin with (they can’t), this ruling clearly violates Line # 2, in that the owners' religious beliefs infringed on the rights of women to receive federally guaranteed healthcare services.

But as far as the court is concerned, the owners’ Christian beliefs trump the rights of the company’s employees to receive these mandated services. This is a clear example of what we’ve been saying is so important to avoid; creating a precedent where people (or worse, corporations) can simply ignore laws that don’t coincide with their religious beliefs. It’s essentially the same as telling Kim Davis that she is free to deny marriage licenses to gay couples, or even black couples, on the basis of nothing more than her bigoted religious convictions. This is not the road we want to go down.

Seidel points out the hypocrisy every step of the way. Fundamentalist conservative Christians, or “Crusaders,” as Seidel refers to them in the book, will deny minority religions of the equivalent rights they advocate for themselves. Crusaders, for instance, will have no problem whatsoever with government officials holding Bible study sessions using government resources, but if those same government officials were instead reading out of the Koran, you’d see a complete 180 reversal in their tune. That’s because religious freedom to Crusaders means nothing more than the freedom to practice and prioritize Christianity—and only their version of Christianity on top of that. This has resulted in the court refusing to remove Christian religious symbols from government property, forcing taxpayers to fund Christian churches and religious education, and allowing Christian churches and organizations to circumvent health regulations during a pandemic. A Christian country is simply what they’re after.

Survey data backs this up. According to a recent national survey of more than 2,000 people, “61% of participants who identified as Republican would be in favor of the U.S. being declared a Christian nation.” Considering all we’ve discussed so far, can you think of anything more terrifying and antithetical to true religious freedom than declaring one particular religion as the “official” religion of the country? Well, the Supreme Court may actually make it happen. And if it does happen, remember that a Christian country to the Crusaders means a country founded on the principles of white supremacy and religiously justified misogyny, racism, and homophobia.

The true constitutionalist would be appalled at this direction. As Seidel wrote, “There is no freedom of religion without a government that is free from religion.” The First Amendment protects our rights (for now) to personally practice any religion or no religion at all and to be free from the religious burdens of others, and the courts should protect this right equally for any religion—especially the minority ones—while drawing the line of lawful religious practice at the point where others are harmed, the rights of others are infringed, or general and neutral secular laws are circumvented. Unfortunately, this common-sense approach to religious freedom is not the one that is currently embraced by the Crusader-packed Supreme Court, and we should all, as a result, be very afraid.

But Seidel has given us the toolkit to think about religious freedom cases, and it’s honestly rather simple. Your religious freedom ends where it places undue burdens on others, just as you wouldn’t want others’ religions placing undue burdens on you (essentially, the Golden Rule). Likewise, you should not be willing to grant your own religion any rights that you are unwilling to grant to the religions of others, and that usually means refraining from religious practice or symbolism on government property or by using government resources. If you don’t want a muslim teaching your kids about the Koran in public schools, then keep your Bible out of the classroom in like measure. You’re free to teach your kids as you wish, privately at home. It’s as simple as that.

And finally, recognize that you are not allowed to circumvent secular laws based on religious beliefs without granting everyone else the same reciprocal right. But if everyone has the capacity to ignore laws based on their own personal religious convictions, then there is little difference between this scenario and having no laws at all.

[B Glenn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Finally, some one passionately and logically calls out the extremists! I so appreciate the author’s ability to provide factual information versus just spouting emotional opinion. Read this and then celebrate your ability to have potentially polarizing conversations and stay calm and informed while doing it.

[Tyler Gresh · Rating 5 out of 5]

I can already tell you this will be another amazing book if it's anything like The Founding Myth. Well researched and incredibly well written. Can't wait for my personalized copy to arrive so I can dive into this one!

[Book Shark · Rating 5 out of 5]

American Crusade: How the Supreme Court Is Weaponizing Religious Freedom by Andrew Seidel

“American Crusade” expertly examines how the Supreme Court is breaking down the walls of church versus state in favor of Christian nationalism. Constitutional and civic rights attorney at the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), Andrew Seidel, demonstrates how the Supreme Court has turned religious freedom into Christian privilege. This important 322-page book includes seventeen chapters broken out by the following three parts: I. Battle Plans, Targets, and the Call to Arms, II. Opening Hostilities, and III. The Onslaught.

Positives:
1. A well-researched, well-organized written book.
2. The fascinating topic of the Supreme Court’s role in imposing Christian nationalism.
3. Reference quality material, a very useful book. Each chapter begins with an appropriate quote. “Those who would renegotiate the boundaries between church and state must therefore answer a difficult question: Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly?” —Sandra Day O’Connor
4. Defines the goal of the Christian activist groups behind attempts to redefine and weaponized religious liberty. “The Crusaders, however, want to return to “tolerance.” They want to go back to a time before the Constitution, when Christians were in charge of everything, unfettered by legal restraints, and when religious minorities and nonbelievers existed on sufferance.”
5. Well thought out and provocative. “Equality is a threat to Christianity as the dominant caste; religious freedom is their answer.”
6. Examines Christian legal supremacy. “Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh were in such a rush to see Ray executed that they ignored the religious freedom of a dying man. Ray was a Black Muslim, not a white Christian. So unlike every Christian Alabama executes, Ray died without religious consolation.”
7. Interesting look at what was behind the selection of the conservative judges. “The justices didn’t just call for the Crusade; they’re active participants. Leonard Leo, the powerbroker at the Federalist Society, selected them and supported or even forced their nomination through because their ideology aligned with the Crusade.”
8. Clarifies key points for the benefit of the reader. “Your right to believe is absolute; your right to act on that belief is not. Second, we draw a line between actions that can and should be regulated, even if religiously motivated, and those that shouldn’t. If your action harms someone else or impacts their rights, it can be regulated, regardless of religious motivation. Third, we draw a line between government power and personal religion; you don’t get to use the machinery of the state to amplify or impose your religion.”
9. Describes the importance of the separation of church and state. “The separation of state and church guarantees equality, so it’s a barrier to the privilege the Crusaders seek.” “They decided that the best protection for true religious liberty is a secular government. There is no freedom of religion without a government that is free from religion.”
10. Religious bigotry examined. “Chick-Fil-A capitalized on its owners’ bigotry. It became a “hub for the anti-same-sex marriage brigade,” and eating there became its own form of activism, leading to long lines and huge profits.”
11. Religious hostilities examined. “First, to let churches access the public purse. Then, to let a Christian-owned business get away with discrimination against LGBTQ people. Then, to uphold a massive government-maintained Christian cross. Next, to open the public treasury for Christian schools. In multiple cases, to let churches exempt themselves from public health orders meant to stop a deadly pandemic.” “This court wants to redefine religious freedom and understands the power in claiming hostility to do so.”
12. A look at Justice Scalia’s bigotry. “Scalia was also a bigot. His guiding judicial philosophy, originalism, is inherently bigoted. Originalism freezes the meaning of laws and our Constitution in the time they were first passed—at a time when women, Blacks, LGBTQ people, Native Americans, nonbelievers, and others were not considered humans worthy of rights and were at the mercy of white Christian men like Scalia.”
13. Examines how Christian supremacy is restored. “By its own terms, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act didn’t redefine but rather restored religious freedom to a gold standard the court supposedly abandoned in the drug counselor case. In “restoring” that standard, Congress advanced Christian supremacy, if inadvertently.”
14. The religious war on women. “Justices Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and Roberts—five Catholic men—decided that billionaires could use the legal structure of a multibillion-dollar corporation to impose their religion on the employees of that company, effectively robbing the employees of their right to preventative health care.”
15. How religious freedom is killing us. “Your religious freedom is not a license to violate the rights of others, including by spreading lethal viruses. In 1905, the Supreme Court upheld mandatory vaccines because “real liberty for all could not exist” if someone was allowed to act “regardless of the injury that may be done to others.”” “Churches weren’t asking the Supreme Court for a right to worship; they were asking for a right to risk everyone’s health and safety.”
16. Examines the religious indoctrination of children. ““No person shall . . . under any pretense whatever . . . be obliged to pay tithes, taxes, or other rates for building or repairing any church or churches, place or places of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes to be right or has deliberately and voluntarily engaged to perform.”
17. Religious freedom and taxes. “Religious parents were, of course, still free to opt out of this fully funded public education system and put their kids in religious schools. They were free to exercise that choice. But it is not then the taxpayers’ responsibility to fund a second parallel system that erodes the first.”
18. Examines religious discrimination. “With a weaponized religious freedom, every law that doesn’t agree with conservative Christian dogma will be riddled with exceptions.”
19. Examines cases against children. “When Illinois recognized civil unions in 2011, Catholic Charities could no longer legally discriminate against gay couples when placing foster children in homes. Instead of helping those children find loving homes with two parents of the same or opposite sex, Catholic Charities opted to shut down altogether, shuttering services across the state when more than 1,000 children needed homes.”
20. Links to notes.

Negatives:
1. No visual supplementary material.
2. No formal bibliography.

In summary, Andrew Seidel follows up his great first book “The Founding Myth” with yet another reference quality book. In this edition, Seidel does a masterful job of exposing how the Supreme Court has privileged Christianity and in doing so robbing Americans of our religious freedom. He provides and examines key Supreme court cases to back up his main and compelling conclusion. A high recommendation!

Further recommendations: “The Founding Myth” by the same author, “Why the Religious Right Is Wrong about Separation of Church and State” by Robert Boston, “Nonbeliever Nation” by David Niose, “Atheists Can’t Be Republicans” by Cj Werleman, “The Dark Side of Christian History” by Helen Ellerbe, “Atheism for Dummies” by Dale McGowan, “Birth Control, Insurance Coverage, & the Religious Right” by A.F. Alexander, “50 popular beliefs that people think are true” by Guy P. Harrison, “Godless” by Dan Barker, “Freethinkers” by Susan Jacoby, “Republican Gomorrah” by Max Blumenthal, “American Fascists” by Chris Hedges, “Doubt” by Jennifer Michael Hecht, “Society Without God” by Phil Zuckerman, and “Why are you Atheists so Angry?” by Greta Christina.

[Eric Wojciechowski · Rating 5 out of 5]

After opening chapters showing some history of the Justices and the issues, Seidel gives us three "Lines" that will be used in reviewing the cases that follow:

Line 1: Americans have the freedom to believe whatever they want. Whatever you want in your own head is up to you.

Line 2: Your beliefs that turn into actions are not absolute. As an example, you may have a religious belief that you have to kill your child (which you may have according to Line 1); however, once that becomes an action, government may step in to stop it because your belief has now become an action that's about to trample on another person's rights.

Line 3: Separation of church and state.

What follows are several Supreme Court cases that the Court allowed a religious (Christian) belief to become an action and/or allowed for a government body to establish a religious belief/action. The Hobby Lobby case is review along with Masterpiece Cakeshop (the bake the cake case), the Muslim Ban (the first major action taken by the Trump Administration), religious exemptions for assembly during the height of COVID 19 pandemic and more. What becomes immediately apparent is that this Supreme Court, with the addition of Justices heavily influenced and biased towards Christian privilege, have been ruling in favor of breaking Line 2 and Line 3. This is a dangerous movement towards setting up Christians as privileged class, where laws are good for others but may be dismissed on religious grounds if the Christian so chooses.

AMERICAN CRUSADE is a warning and alarm that America may have forgotten how bad a theocracy is and having a Supreme Court that nods in such a direction of one with Christianity as the high ground, the American experiment may be on the ropes.

[Rebekah Kohlhepp · Rating 4 out of 5]

If I could summarize this book in one word, I would say it is difficult. At times it is difficult to comprehend due to legal jargon (even after the author purposely trimmed the fat, so to speak) but it is immensely difficult to stomach. This was a book I had to read slowly and take plenty of breaks from. It wasn’t a fun book, and it wasn’t intended to be.

Read more: https://sheseeksnonfiction.blog/2022/...

[Ayn Nys · Rating 4 out of 5]

A disturbing look at how the Supreme Court lost its objectivity decades ago.

[Karayah Whiseheart · Rating 5 out of 5]

“You must unshackle your mind from the belief that the Supreme Court is an impartial arbiter of truth and justice. The Crusades depends upon people believing this myth. McConnell, Trump and Leo cheated and stole and packed the courts to put their collaborators in place not because they would administer justice evenhandedly, but because they wouldn’t.”
The Founding Myth is one of the best books I’ve ever read, so my expectations for American Crusade was exceptionally high. Andrew has surpassed those expectations with every delicious page I read. The Supreme Court is broken. This didn’t just “happen”; Christian nationalists have been organized and united for decades with an insidious plot to corrupt the Supreme Court. Christian nationalists prey on people’s ignorance and indoctrinate people with false propaganda. My father is a “conservative Constitutionalist.” I went to an extremely conservative Christian college. I was indoctrinated into believing a tremendous amount of propaganda about a Christian founding which never happened. We have to understand how we got here and what we’re up against in order to find against their web of lies. American Crusade reveals the “man behind the curtain.” Andrew’s book takes a deep, unbelievably thorough dive to arm us with information against the Christian nationalists’ intentionally deceitful narratives and propaganda.
The topic of this book intimated me. One of the reasons the Christian nationalism propaganda worked on me for so long is because I was a tremendously politically and legally illiterate person for the first 25 years of my life. My gut reaction to being overwhelmed and discouraged was to stick my head in the sand, so I did for years. Despite my background and the fact I’ve never been to law school, American Crusade has been a pleasure to read. Andrew’s writing is approachable while being remarkably informative and profound. We have a long, dark road ahead of us, but disengaging is a privilege. Let American Crusade radicalize you.

[Gendou · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm a huge believer in the thesis of this book. The SCOTUS has been taken over by the religious Right. They've weaponized religious freedom to make judgements that favor Christianity at the cost of constitutional and human rights.

However I have a couple gripes with Seidel's writing style. He uses that typical lawyer rhetoric rife with non-neutral framing. This is too bad because much of the time his devastating zingers are totally accurate. But sometimes they're not. Sometimes they're purely rhetorical and I'm put off by that because it strikes me as dishonest. He's also wrong about the death row case, and tried to hand wave away inconvenient details of that case by claiming, wrongly, that they're unimportant. I'm okay with a summary, but his treatment of that particular case was not intellectually honest. This put me on guard for the entire rest of the book, having a hard time taking for granted that his summaries are honest and accurate.

He also got another case wrong. Or at least, his stances are self-contradictory. On the one hand, he gives the specific example of property rights as a right that stands above freedom of religion. The hypothetical example was a preacher in your back yard who won't leave because the land is sacred. But this is exactly the case for sacred Native American land in which case he flips his allegiance. This makes no sense to me. I don't understand why use of land, not owned by a tribe, should be dictated by that tribe on religious grounds. Clearly it should not, for the same reason as in the hypothetical about a preacher in my back yard.

[Luv · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was thoroughly impressed by the level of research and thought that went into the writing of this book. Mr. Seidel, after all, was in a part of several of the cases he highlights. As a fan of his work with the Freedom From Religion Foundation, his previous book "The Founding Myth," and his appearances on the Opening Arguments podcast, I was couldn't wait to read this! I kept a notebook by my side as I read.

Throughout the book, Mr. Seidel masterfully explores the intersection of religion and the courts in the United States, and challenges readers to consider the ways in which certain religious beliefs and practices have been given preferential treatment in our society. One particularly striking moment for me came towards the end of the book when Mr. Seidel pointed out the double standard that exists when it comes to exemptions from certain laws or requirements on the basis of religion. To see how certain groups are allowed to opt out of things like mandatory military service or vaccinations, while others who value human and animal lives are not afforded the same leeway is disgusting. He isn't highlighting anything we already know, but it made me uncomfortable that I have just accepted it as the way things are and never challenged it.

The book's portrayal of the discrimination faced by the LGBTQ+ community and other religions in the face of Christian dominance in the US courts is both heartbreaking and enraging.

[Jamie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I support freedom of religion, even for those who do not share my faith. I'm a U.S. citizen, and I take my responsibilities as a voter very seriously. I have been following along as the current Supreme Court, has decided some major cases, clearly along partisan lines.

American Crusade talks about the current members of the Court, tracing the appointment of the newest members to a wealthy, powerful religious (mostly Catholic) lobby. It also goes back in time, breaking down many religious based cases, and asserting that powerful people behind the scenes have manipulated the makeup of the Court in order to legislate from the bench, dissolving the separation of Church and State without seeming to do so.

I learned a lot from this book. Clearly, the Court is not as objective as I was led to believe when I was taught about the three branches of government in school, and probably never has been. Maybe we as voters should push for judicial reform at the highest level.

I would give this more stars, but the author often fails to hide his own anti-religious bias - sometimes his anti-Christian vitriol distracts from the points he's trying to make, which is too bad, because he seems to have done a lot of research on this important topic. Atheists can also be dogmatic, to the point where "freedom from religion" can also be a "religion."

[Goat · Rating 5 out of 5]

What an utterly depressing book.

In conclusion, Andrew Seidel basically said: “assuming that things remain exactly the same and dont get worse, we are fucked for the next 50 years at least”.

Is anyone else even remotely surprised that religion uses the non-democratic, semi authoritarian branch of the government to force ideology on everyone else?

Religion cannot survive on its own in the marketplace of ideas, so, as always, relies on indoctrination and force, just like old times.

The irony is that since religiosity rather than reasoning is the rational that christian nationalists provide, any counter position can apply the same techniques l.

Of course, this doesn’t work in practice because “religious freedom” is a dog whistle from christian supremacy in America, but wouldn’t it be fun to have Satanic boarding schools and ask taxpayers for money to fund it or demand abortions because satan said so?

Just brainstorming some ideas, but I’m sure you get my point.

———————————————————————

On another note, I am seriously questioning wether the US has ever been a democracy considering legal institutions such as the supreme cult.. I mean, court and the electoral college.

[Eric · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well-written summary of key recent US Supreme Court decisions on the separation of church and state, and how an aggressive coalition of conservative Christian foundations (Seidel calls them "Crusaders") have used (or perhaps abused) extensive First Amendment litigation and a friendly Supreme Court to reshape the First Amendment's constitutional protection for religion. His pointed analysis highlights how recent cases seeking constitutional protection for religious freedom are being used as a "sword" not a "shield" in order to permit conservative Christians to claim privileges not available to others, and to use the government to further their religious goals (e.g., by using voucher programs to make state and local governments provide support for Christian schools). I found his arguments persuasive.

[Bob · Rating 4 out of 5]

I gave it 4 instead of 5 stars because of the vaccines rhetoric. I understand this and remember the media attention towards the religious objections during the lockdown, however labeling “anti” should also be balanced with labeling “pro”. I also understand mentioning the number of people who are not religious were also “non-compliant “ to “public health mandates distracts from the main thesis of the book. Religious groups were not the only groups in opposition to the draconian lockdowns & mandates!
Otherwise, I learned so much and it raised my awareness of SCOTUS news to follow in the future

[Dawn Anderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I would recommend this book to anyone concerned about the manipulation by the religious zealots that now make up the majority of SCOTUS. Seidel’s book is very informative about how rulings by the SC are lending favor to the Christian right, the hypocrisy in their rulings and the threat to people who are not in that sphere. I loved the clear explanations he provides that really teaches how the first amendment works, but also with humor and a touch of sarcasm. The ‘Jesus take the wheel’ commentary in chapter one was amusing, but scary as he delved into cases that involved the aspect of fanaticism impacting the lives of others. Well-written, easy to understand, with a touch of humor to help clarify to the reader what is at stake. It made me a bit angry that more wasn’t done to give more balance to the SC. I will be reading The Founding Myth, and following Seidel’s new podcast series. This non-believer extends thanks for all he does to work on this issue. A good read, for sure.

[Arianna]

Highly researched and written in a way that is easily digestible. I found this incredibly interesting, while at the same time, making me so mad at the state of our country and what goes on in the Supreme Court.

There are a lot of good nonfiction books out there that pertain to things like this, but this, while obviously not comprehensive (I don't think that is possible with the amount of cases being brought to the Supreme Court every year), was a really important read.

[Molly · Rating 5 out of 5]

Aside from making me want to yeet my phone into the sun with anger, a very good book making a very strong case about the separation of church and state in the name of religious freedom and how this part of the Constitution is crumbling more and more each year. Offered contemporary examples like the infamous same-sex marriage wedding cake case, Muslim Ban, Kim Davis not giving marriage licenses, etc.