By Calvin Warner
Texas Freedom Network Board Member
Texas classrooms belong to all of us; to children of every faith, and of none. But when Governor Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 10 into law in 2025, he handed the government a power it was never meant to have: the power to tell Texas children what kind of faith is acceptable. SB 10 requires public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom, sending a clear message to students who don’t share that tradition that they are less valued, and telling Texas families that the government – not parents, not trusted faith leaders – is in charge of their children’s religious instruction. That’s not freedom. That’s government overreach.
Texas Freedom Network opposes SB 10 because religious instruction of Texas children is a sacred matter for families and their chosen faith communities, not a job for the government. Religious Freedom is a foundational value in our country, so much so that it is protected in our Constitution. SB 10 trades in religious freedom for government meddling in our most deeply personal matters.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office supports the bill, writing that “The Ten Commandments are indisputably a cornerstone of America’s moral and legal heritage. Our founders drew upon the eternal truths captured in these commandments to form a nation built on law and ordered Liberty.”
Regardless of how one views the Ten Commandments personally, it is not the government’s place to decide which religious texts belong in children’s public school classrooms. That decision belongs to families. If the goal of the law were to teach general Western values, there are far more direct ways to do so (the Bill of Rights or the Preamble, for instance). The requirement to show sacred texts like the Ten Commandments is, at its core, a government-sponsored religious display — which the First Amendment explicitly prohibits.
Its plain text states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” and courts have consistently held that the government may not sponsor religious exercises in public schools.
Separation of Church and State
In fact, the Supreme Court already settled this question in Stone v. Graham (1980), ruling that a Kentucky statute requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools is unconstitutional. The State is aware of this case but argues that the precedent should be revisited. From TFN’s perspective, this is a sign that this law is less about legal merit and more about promoting a political agenda.
It’s worth noting that the Supreme Court permitted Texas to display the Ten Commandments at the Capitol, Van Orden v. Perry (2005). The Court reasoned that the monument in question was a relevant nod to the state’s cultural heritage. This shows that the mere display of religious language on public grounds is not unconstitutional. The state crosses the line when it uses its power to promote a single faith to schoolchildren – a uniquely impressionable and captive audience.
The purpose of the Establishment Clause is to maintain a clear boundary between church and state. As the Court explained in Reynolds v. United States (1878), this “wall of separation” protects citizens from government-imposed religious overreach.
Consider why such separation matters. What if the state endorses a different religion than your own, or even the same religion but a different denomination? This was the very plight that drove the Pilgrims to leave their homeland and found this country 400 years ago. It is also the hardship that religious minorities suffer under theocratic governments today.
Thomas Jefferson said it best: “religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals.”
Likewise James Madison, known today as the Father of the Constitution, remarked that state support for Christianity “is a contradiction to the Christian Religion itself, for every page of it disavows a dependence on the powers of this world: it is a contradiction to fact; for it is known that this Religion both existed and flourished, not only without the support of human laws, but in spite of every opposition from them.”
The principle of church-state separation was enshrined precisely to protect the freedom of families to practice faith – or not – on their own terms. Texans of all beliefs deserve better than leaders who exploit religion for political points rather than protecting the freedoms our Constitution guarantees.
TFN files Amicus Brief in Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District
The fight against SB 10 is now in the courts, and TFN is on the front lines. In Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District, a coalition of Texas families representing diverse religious backgrounds – including rabbis, a cantor, a reverend, and parents of many faiths – sued to block the law. A federal district court granted a preliminary injunction, and the case is now before the Fifth Circuit en banc, meaning all 17 judges are hearing it together, a signal of just how consequential this case is. TFN joined our partners at Intercultural Development Research Association (IDRA), Pastors for Texas Children, Students Engaged in Advancing Texas (SEAT), Our Schools Our Democracy, and Every Texan in filing an amicus brief urging the court to affirm the injunction.
We argued what we’ve always believed: that SB 10 undermines the mission of Texas public schools, creates a hostile environment for students of minority faiths, and strips Texas families of their right to guide their own children’s religious lives.
The Beauty of Faith
Some may admit that displaying the Ten Commandments favors one religion while arguing it does not harm others. But imagine, for a moment, if your local school required classrooms to display verses from the Quran. Many Christians, or adherents of other faiths, would likely feel excluded and coerced, and rightfully so. Religious freedom protects us against this kind of state-imposed preference. No child should walk into their classroom and feel that the state has already decided their beliefs are wrong. Every child in Texas deserves to be treated with dignity, no matter who they are or what they believe.
In addition to being unconstitutional, the bill requiring the Ten Commandment display is simply arbitrary. Many Christians might reasonably ask why the legislature chose Old Testament verses rather than the teachings of Jesus himself or any number of other passages.
Further, if Biblical passages must be displayed in classrooms, should courts be ordered to display verses about judgment, or the IRS scriptures on taxation? Once the door is opened, government bureaucrats become theologians. It is not the job of the legislature to tell us the true meaning of our faith.
Religious freedom is fundamental to our democracy. TFN opposes religious displays in public schools not out of hostility to religion. Instead, we believe it is an insult to the beauty of faith when the government tells you what to believe.
Want to learn more? Check out an explainer of S.B. 10 here, written as part of our 89th Legislative Session Recap series.
Want to support our work? Donate to Texas Freedom Network to keep us in the fight to protect religious freedom in Texas.
About the author: Calvin is an attorney in Austin, Texas and an adjunct professor at St. Edward’s University.
