Defending Constitutional Liberties: A Response to the ACLU's Open Letter on Public School Chaplains

In a recent open letter opposing chaplains in public schools, a coalition of organizations – led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – reiterated their longstanding commitment to a strict and fallacious understanding of the so-called “separation of church and state.” While the ACLU’s position isn’t a surprise, the ACLJ has stepped forward with an open letter of our own to state legislatures across the country, refuting the concerns raised in the ACLU’s letter.

The crux of the issue lies in interpreting the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” While some, such as the ACLU, advocate for an impenetrable wall separating church and state, our response points out that historical context and current judicial precedent provide a more nuanced understanding.

The response highlights recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, particularly Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, which emphasized the importance of historical practices and understandings in interpreting the Establishment Clause. Contrary to popular belief, the Court has never advocated for a complete separation between church and state. Rather, it has recognized the role of religion in American society while ensuring that the government does not coerce individuals into religious practices.

One of the key arguments presented by the ACLU is the concern over “indoctrination” in public school chaplaincy programs. However, as our response explains, as long as participation remains voluntary and no student is compelled to engage in religious activities, such programs can indeed be constitutional. For this reason, schools need to make it clear that no student may be coerced to use the services offered by a chaplain and that any student involvement with a chaplain must be purely voluntary. Parental notification and approval would be a sure way of assuring a lack of any coercion.

Finally, the response underscores the importance of religious neutrality in public schools, emphasizing that accommodating the religious beliefs of students does not equate to establishing a state religion. As Justice Kennedy once wrote, “[T]he Establishment Clause permits government some latitude in recognizing and accommodating the central role religion plays in our society.” In fact, the accommodation of religious beliefs and practices has been a key part of our constitutional framework since day one. As the Supreme Court affirmed in Kennedy, the Establishment Clause does not “‘compel the government to purge from the public sphere’ anything an objective observer could reasonably infer endorses or ‘partakes of the religious.’”

As our letter noted:

So long as a public-school chaplaincy program ensures that student participation is purely voluntary and takes measures to guarantee an absence of any coercion—and so long as no religious test is imposed on chaplains—there is nothing under current Establishment Clause jurisprudence that would forbid it outright. For the ACLU and others to suggest otherwise is wrong.

Our open letter to state legislatures considering school chaplaincy programs concludes that, simply put, “a school chaplaincy program is not inherently unconstitutional.” In a world where children in our schools today face a litany of challenges that many of us could have never imagined, it would be incredibly dangerous and disheartening to deny these students any potential access to the spiritual care that we provide our men and women in the military and Congress.