Freedom Updates
Press Releases
PRESS RELEASE | MISSOURI COURT PROTECTS FREE SPEECH IN CHURCH CLASH WITH GENDER IDEOLOGY
ADVOCATES FOR FAITH & FREEDOM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, sEPTEMBER 4, 2025
CONTACT: Lori Sanada
media@FAITH-FREEDOM.COM
St. Charles, Missouri — Advocates for Faith & Freedom announces today that the St. Charles Circuit Court has granted every motion to dismiss in favor of the Defendants in Roberson v. Grace Church. The Court threw out the Plaintiff’s defamation and conspiracy claims, which the Defendants argued were without merit. The Court’s ruling reaffirms the constitutional protections of Free Speech and Religious Liberty.
The lawsuit, filed by Plaintiff, stated that Plaintiff, born a biological man, wears “masculine and feminine clothing” with “make-up (mascara and eye shadow)” and has a beard or goatee, which was referred to in the legal filings as Plaintiff’s “natural facial hair.” The legal filings describe how plaintiff worked at the public library, which included a rotation in the children’s section of the public library. The Defendants, which included individuals from the community such as Jane Puszkar, Vanessa Hagedorn, and Rachel Homolak, as well as Grace Church advocated for the library to adopt a gender-neutral dress code because the Plaintiff’s gender non-conforming dress created confusion in young children’s minds, as they were not mature or developed enough to process the experience. For voicing concerns about exposing young children to gender ideology, Defendants were sued by Plaintiff for alleged defamation and conspiracy. After careful review of the allegations, however, the Court dismissed each and every claim against the Defendants, finding them legally insufficient.
“This case was built on meritless claims that sought to silence churches and concerned citizens,” said Bob Tyler, President and Chief Counsel of Advocates for Faith & Freedom. “The Court’s decision is more than just a dismissal—it is a resounding victory for Free Speech and Religious Liberty. The First Amendment protects the right of churches and individuals to speak and live out their faith without fear of retaliation through baseless lawsuits.”
With the ruling, Grace Church can focus fully on its mission of serving the St. Charles community and advancing its ministry, and the individual Defendants such as Jane Puszkar, Vanessa Hagedorn, and Rachel Homolak may continue on with their lives without threat of financial ruin. While the Plaintiff may still pursue appeal, the decision marks an important legal affirmation of the First Amendment rights guaranteed to churches and faithful individuals across Missouri and the United States.
“This outcome strengthens the principle that the courts will not be used to punish people of faith for speaking openly and truthfully,” added Erin Mersino of Advocates for Faith & Freedom. “The Court found that the allegations against our Clients were legally insufficient on their face and dismissed them at the earliest possible time. And even though we believe that this case should never have been brought in the first place, our clients’ response has been inspiring. They faced this unjust lawsuit with courage, strength, and resolve. We celebrate this victory with them.”
The St. Charles Circuit Court Opinion is available here.
###
Advocates for Faith & Freedom is a non-profit law firm dedicated to protecting constitutional and religious liberty in the courts. Our mission is to engage in cases that will uphold our religious liberty and America’s heritage and to educate Americans about our fundamental constitutional rights.
PRESS RELEASE | ADVOCATES FOR FAITH & FREEDOM FILES BRIEF BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT TO REINSTATE RELIGIOUS EXEMPTIONS FROM MANDATORY VACCINATION
ADVOCATES FOR FAITH & FREEDOM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, sEPTEMBER 3, 2025
CONTACT: Lori Sanada
media@FAITH-FREEDOM.COM
Murrieta, CA — Advocates for Faith & Freedom, a leading advocate for the protection of religious liberty and constitutional freedoms, today announced the filing of its important brief with the United States Supreme Court in the case Miller v. McDonald. The brief urges the Supreme Court to protect the fundamental right to religious liberty and reinstate it as the cornerstone of the First Amendment.
At issue in Miller v. McDonald is New York’s decision to remove all religious exemptions from its compulsory vaccination law for school children. New York had allowed religious exemptions for over 50 years. When it amended its law, however, some of the law’s sponsors in the New York legislature spoke very negatively about people who hold religious objections to vaccination, calling their religious beliefs “trash” or “fake.” One legislator called a people who have religious objections to vaccination “a heretic.” The Governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, had previously received negative press for telling a congregation that people who had religious objections to the COVID-19 vaccine “aren’t listening to God” and that their religious concerns are “not truth.”
The Petitioners in Miller v. McDonald are Amish families who live an isolated, devoutly religious life away from modern day society. The Petitioners object to the state-mandated vaccinations on religious grounds due to some vaccinations’ reliance on the use of aborted fetal cells during their manufacturing and testing. While New York’s law does not allow any religious exemptions, it does allow non-religious, medical exemptions. The law also does not apply to everyone in New York schools. For example, the law does not require schoolteachers or other adults who work in the schools to be vaccinated, only children. The law also does not address the myriad locations where children spend time or might contract an illness outside of school.
The Amish schools and families in Miller v. McDonald have been fined $118,000.00 for failing to comply with New York vaccine law. New York officials know of Petitioners’ religious objections but are still requiring they pay the onerous fines. The outcome of this case has the potential to shape the scope of religious freedom protections for generations.
“Our founding fathers enshrined religious liberty as our first freedom because they understood that to have a free society men and women must be able to live out their sincerely held faith without coercion. This is essential to both democracy and human dignity,” said Erin Mersino of Advocates for Faith and Freedom. “We are urging the Supreme Court to stop New York from shaking down the Amish community with ruinous fines for simply staying true to their faith beliefs.”
Advocates for Faith & Freedom’s Amicus Curiae brief is available here.
###
Advocates for Faith & Freedom is a non-profit law firm dedicated to protecting constitutional and religious liberty in the courts. Our mission is to engage in cases that will uphold our religious liberty and America’s heritage and to educate Americans about our fundamental constitutional rights.
Press Release | Santa Clara County Employees Sue County for Failing to Accommodate Their Religious Beliefs
ADVOCATES FOR FAITH & FREEDOM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, August 27, 2025
CONTACT: Lori Sanada
media@FAITH-FREEDOM.COM
Murrieta, CA — Advocates for Faith and Freedom in conjunction with Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz have filed suit in the Northern District of California on behalf of 33 current and former Santa Clara County employees against Santa Clara County for failing to accommodate their religious beliefs. Plaintiffs allege religious discrimination in violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution, Title VII, and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
In late 2021, the County began placing employees on indefinite, unpaid administrative leave if they could not get the COVID-19 vaccine due to their deeply held religious beliefs and were deemed by the County to be in ‘high-risk’ positions. Many positions were wrongly classified as high risk—such as the roofer who worked alone in the open air.
For those who did work in allegedly “high-risk” positions, they were not provided with reasonable accommodations to allow them to continue to work. And once the rest of the State permitted non-vaccinated individuals to return to work with accommodations that included masking and testing, Santa Clara County refused to consider such accommodations for the religiously exempt.
Furthermore, in a related case brought by Advocates, a federal judge has already found that the County’s policy which gave employees with a disability or medical contraindication exemption to the vaccine mandate likely operated “in a way that targets” religious practice and disadvantaged religious exemptions compared to secular exemptions.
For standing up for their religious beliefs, Plaintiffs were indefinitely deprived of their source of income, forcing many to face serious financial hardships. “Our firm is proud to represent these Plaintiffs, who were willing to give up everything, including livelihoods, health insurance and, in some cases, their houses and personal belongings, to remain faithful to their beliefs” says Sam Kane an attorney for Advocates for Faith & Freedom. “Discrimination and the needless harm to people because of their faith cannot be tolerated.”
###
Advocates for Faith & Freedom is a non-profit law firm dedicated to protecting constitutional and religious liberty in the courts. Our mission is to engage in cases that will uphold our religious liberty and America’s heritage and to educate Americans about our fundamental constitutional rights.