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 Joseph Clement explain the US Supreme Court's decisions on a donor privacy case and several parental rights cases. Additionally, we explain a recent ruling that could limit mailing the abortion pill, as well as a tax credit for donations for pregnancy resource centers.

In this episode, we discuss:

1:49 The US Supreme Court recently decided First Choice v. Platkin. The Court held that New Jersey's AG's attempt to force a pro-life pregnancy resource center to hand over confidential donor information violated their Constitutional rights.

14:12 The US Supreme Court recently declined two major parental rights cases. In March, the Court ruled that parental exclusion policies, which instruct public school staff to lie to parents while affirming a student's new "gender identity" violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments. These cases offered the Court an opportunity to further defend parental rights and expand upon its decision in Mirabelli.

21:15 Citing Dobbs v. Jackson, the Fifth Circuit stayed a regulation that removed the requirement in-person doctor's visits before a woman can obtain the abortion pill. The regulation is likely headed to the US Supreme Court.

31:04 South Carolina recently unanimously passed a new tax credit for donations to pregnancy resource centers and centers for victims of human trafficking. Several other states have similar such laws.

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

Topics: Religious liberty, religious freedom, Constitutional rights, donor privacy, law and policy, legal updates, abortion pill, pro-life laws, abortion law, US legal system.

The Napa Legal Podcast, May 5, 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 Joseph Clement explain a new religious liberty case at SCOTUS, a lawsuit centered on the 10 Commandments, and a new law in Tennessee that will protect children from harmful and scarring operations.

In this episode, we discuss:

1:31 The US Supreme Court recently agreed to hear the next major religious liberty case - St. Mary's v. Roy. The state of Colorado excluded the Catholic school from its universal preschool program because of its religious beliefs about gender and the human person. The Court will decide whether government entities can evade protections for religious organizations and the First Amendment through facial neutrality regardless of substantive discrimination.

18:46 The Fifth Circuit recently upheld Texas' law that requires the 10 Commandments to be displayed in every public school classroom. The opinion explains that a historical understanding of religious establishment requires government coercion and control of belief, which is not present in this case.

31:11 Tennessee recently enacted law that allow patients to sue doctors that perform “transgender surgeries” on minors. The law authorizes individuals older than 18 to sue doctors that performed certain procedures on them while they were minors, which include medically unnecessary mastectomies and prescribing puberty blockers.

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

Topics: Religious freedom, religious liberty, First Amendment, Carson, Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, Fulton, Smith, religious discrimination, freedom of religion, Establishment Clause, Founding of America, caselaw, legal updates, legal podcast.

The Napa Legal Podcast, April 28, 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 Joseph Clement explain the free speech rights of church leaders, censorship of Christian beliefs, and victory for a pro-life advocate.

In this episode, we discuss:

1:47 A federal court recently dismissed an attempt to protect the ability of churches to make statements about political candidates. The Johnson Amendment bans certain nonprofit organizations from endorsing candidates for office. While the current administration has limited its enforcement, it remains on the books. A lawsuit seeking to declare it unconstitutional was dismissed and is expected to be appealed.

9:59 A social worker in Oregon was fired after he put up several books in his office that affirmed the reality of God-given sex. He filed a lawsuit based on his rights to Free Speech and Free Exercise. We discuss the purpose of free speech in America, especially in light of recent developments on both sides of the political aisle.

25:54 A pro-life advocate was awarded over $1 million from the DOJ after a wrongful arrest by the Biden administration under the FACE Act. Mark Houck was arrested at gunpoint after protecting his 12-year-old son from a 72-year-old abortion escort while praying outside of an abortion clinic. He was acquitted of the charges in 2023; following the acquittal, Houck filed suit against the DOJ for malicious and retaliatory prosecution. He recently settled for one million dollars.

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

Topics: Free Speech, Free Exercise of Religion, Religious Freedom, Religious Liberty, First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Planned Parenthood, Transgenderism.

The Napa Legal Podcast, April 21, 2026.

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty

Can the U.S. Supreme Court expand and strengthen parental rights under the Constitution?

In this episode of the Napa Legal Podcast, Frank DeVito is joined by John Bursch, the Senior Counsel and Vice President of Appellate Advocacy at the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), to discuss the future of parental rights and the Supreme Court.

They examine major pending SCOTUS cases and discuss how the Court could go beyond existing precedent to more clearly protect parents’ constitutional right to direct the upbringing of their children.

Key Moments:

0:47 Introduction

3:01 Are parental rights written in the Constitution?

5:48 The current state of parental rights caselaw at the U.S. Supreme Court - Mahmoud and Mirabelli

9:38 Do public schools still secretly "socially transition" kids against parents' wishes with "parental exclusion policies"? Did Mirabelli fix the issue?

11:39 What is the emergency docket, and how is it relevant to parental rights and these cases? Noting Justice Kagan's dissent in Mirabelli.

14:54 Substantive Due Process and the history and tradition of abortion and parental rights. Noting Roe v. Wade.

16:54 A case currently pending before the Supreme Court that could strike at the merits of parental rights - Foote v. Ludlow. In this case, a public school secretly treated children like they were members of the opposite sex against the direct and explicit wishes of the children's parents. School officials tried to convince the children that their parents were not on their side or acting in their best interest.

20:55 The state of affirms of public morals, as well as the urgent need for legal protection of children from activist government overreach

26:48 Constitutional theories for unenumerated parental rights.

30:35 Changing the culture and winning public support back to morality.

35:22 Free speech and compelled pronoun usage.

36:57 How concerned and passionate citizens can help.

John Bursch is Senior Counsel and Director of Appellate Advocacy at the Alliance Defending Freedom. He has argued over a dozen US Supreme Court cases. He previously served as the solicitor general of Michigan from 2011 to 2013.

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

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

To learn more about Napa Legal and our work, visit us at our website:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org

The Napa Legal Podcast, April 14, 2026

In this episode of the Napa Legal Podcast, Frank DeVito is joined by Jeffrey Trissell, a California attorney that worked on Mirabelli v. Bonta, a landmark parental rights case recently decided by the US Supreme Court. They discuss the case itself, as well as Jeffrey's advocacy for Churches that sought to serve their members during COVID but faced an uphill legal battle.

Key Moments:

0:55 Introduction

1:46 The basics of Mirabelli v. Bonta - A case recently decided by the US Supreme Court that held that California's "parental exclusion policy" likely violates the Constitution. The policy instructed staff to treat children like they are members of the opposite sex and lie to parents that disagreed.

7:06 The experience of the teachers and families that brought the lawsuit

8:31 The path to the Supreme Court

12:10 The impact of the Supreme Court's decision

17:15 The emergency docket, how the judiciary operates, and Justice Kagan's dissent

19:58 Jeffrey's work representing churches that faced religious discrimination in the COVID era

23:35 South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom at the Supreme Court

24:50 Is today's legal landscape for religious freedom different from 2020?

Jeffrey M. Trissell is an accomplished civil litigator with numerous wins in both state and federal court. In addition to his work in private practice, he serves as special counsel to the Thomas More Society. The majority of his practice is devoted to constitutional rights, which includes First Amendment litigation. He recently published his book "Unlocking the Churches - the legal victory against California's pandemic-era religious discrimination."

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

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

To learn more about Napa Legal and our work, visit us at our website:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org

The Napa Legal Podcast, April 10, 2026

What is the telos and purpose of freedom?

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 Joseph Clement explain the Supreme Court's ruling in Chiles v. Salazar regarding Colorado's ban on traditionally Christian counselling, pro-life laws in Kansas and New Hampshire, and the conviction of Finland citizen Päivi Räsänen’s for "hate speech" based on her Christian beliefs.

In this episode, we discuss:

1:30 The Supreme Court's ruling in Chiles v. Salazar. Colorado banned all therapy that sought to help a minor embrace his or her God-given sex. The Court recently ruled that the ban violates the Free Speech Clause and constitutes illegal discrimination. We explain the merits and potential sources of concern in the majority opinion.

19:11 The Kansas Legislature recently passed a law that protect pro-life pregnancy resource centers from government discrimination, overturning the Governor Laura Kelly's veto. A similar bill is advancing in New Hampshire

25:47 Päivi Räsänen, a Finnish politician, was recently convicted of hate speech and crimes against humanity for a pamphlet she made over 20 years ago titled "Male and Female He Created Them – Homosexual Relationships Challenge the Christian Concept of Humanity." She criticized homosexual relationships as sinful.

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

Topics: First Amendment, freedom of religion, religious liberty, legal news, legal podcast, SCOTUS.

The Napa Legal Podcast, April 8, 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 Joseph Clement explain another lawsuit against the 10 Commandments in public schools, whether religious organizations can hire according to their faith, and a Jewish charter school in Oklahoma.

In this episode, we discuss:

1:27 A district judge recently ruled against Arkansas' law that required the posting of the 10 Commandments in every public school classroom. The ruling rejects the logic of the Fifth Circuit's decision in a similar case. We explain how the Free Exercise and Establishment Clause work in this case and how the district judge's opinion ignores the history of religion in public schools

13:29 The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago is a Christian college that provides students with a degree in education. As a graduation requirement, students must gain experience teaching in both public and private schools. However, Chicago Public Schools denied those students access into its student-teacher program because Moody hires only other Christians. Recently the parties settled in a manor favorable to Moody.

23:26 A Jewish charter school is filing a lawsuit over its denial of charter school status in Oklahoma. The case is poised as a re-do of St. Isidore of Seville v. Drummond. The case may reach the Supreme Court, who could rule on whether religious charter schools violate the Establishment Clause.

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

Topics: First Amendment, freedom of religion, religious liberty, legal news, legal podcast, SCOTUS.

The Napa Legal Podcast, March 31, 2026.

#freedomofreligion #religiousliberty

Can public schools shut down pro-life students?

In this episode of the Napa Legal Podcast, Joseph Clement is joined by Mathew Hoffmann, legal counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom. They discuss free speech law in public schools and related case that is currently pending before the US Supreme Court. In E.D. v. Noblesville School District, a student pro-life organization was shut down after posting flyers advertising its first event. The students argue that the school's censorship violates their First Amendment right to Free Speech.

Key Moments:

0:41 Introduction

2:45 The facts in this case: pro-life student was censored by public school administrators

8:45 Current laws on free speech in public schools - Hazelwood and Tinker

15:40 How courts apply school laws - are students protected or at risk of losing their rights?

17:17 Lemon and the reasonable observer test

21:07 Free Speech vs. Free Exercise claims in public schools

24:45 What could this case impact? What does a win look like?

26:55 The balance of protecting curriculum and protecting free speech

30:07 School speech in the lower courts

32:07 Are there laws that can protect student speech? Are there legislative solutions?

37:21 Should everyone care about free speech in public schools?

Mathew Hoffmann serves as legal counsel on the Appellate Advocacy Team at Alliance Defending Freedom, where he represents ADF clients before state and federal appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Previously, he served in ADF’s Center for Free Speech and Center for Academic Freedom. He has represented clients in free expression cases across the country and has argued before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Seventh and Ninth Circuits and the Alabama Supreme Court.

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

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org/the-napa-legal-podcast

To learn more about Napa Legal and our work, visit us at our website:

https://www.napalegalinstitute.org

The Napa Legal Podcast, March 27, 2026