Church-State | Bohler Legal & Media

David Bohler

Kimberly Spencer

JTC328

6 May 2026

1rst Amendment, Separation of Church and State

Render unto the government that which is the government’s

“[T]he expression ‘law respecting an establishment of religion’ probably does not so vividly remind present-day Americans of the evils, fears, and political problems that caused that expression to be written into our Bill of Rights” (Justice Black, 1947). Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black wrote this in the majority opinion in Everson v. Board of Education. It directly affected John Eward “Jay” Jordon, 82, then.

Jordan was 5 years old when the Supreme Court affirmed transportation funding for his Catholic school education in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in the landmark case Everson v. Board of Education (1947). Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black referenced the ‘wall’ that must separate church and state, writing that it be kept “high and impregnable,” while the Court narrowly approved transportation funding for religious schools. “This case will likely be referenced later this year,” Jordan said, referring to the Supreme Court’s Colorado-based St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy case. The Court will determine whether government funding should be given to religious pre-school programs, where contemporary social issues, such as gender identity, may be influenced by religion.

“I’ve seen very good religious-based school programs, having been raised in a Catholic school,” Jordon remembered, reflecting on his time in Pittsburgh and how religious influence in education affected his life.

“Let’s just say, George Carlin distills my religion now,” Jordan said loudly to overcome the NASCAR racing event he had press credentials for.

Jordan continued talking on the phone as he stepped away from the roaring track, reflecting on the Establishment Clause in his education. “Religion was part of the framework in neighborhoods, and their associated schools were heavily segregated by denomination then, mainly among Protestants and Catholics,” Jordan said, distinguishing religion as an inherent social element that supported education.

Like the court, Jordan narrowly agrees with the Everson decision. “It would have been the same bus, whether to a Catholic school or a public school next door,” Jordan said, and added, “This distinction between funding religion and funding safe transportation should be the guideline for the Court’s Colorado case this year.” Notably, 88% of CSU poll respondents, the highest level of support among divisions, back this distinction, suggesting the Supreme Court should deny funding to religious schools that don’t adhere to federal educational mandates.

Jordan currently lives in Boulder City, NV, and creates digital content on the Establishment Clause and other Bill of Rights issues. He also reports on a broad range of social, economic, political, and passion-based topics, drawing on 30 years of teaching journalism in California at Cal. State, Long Beach, and West Los Angeles College. Jordan’s lifelong career in journalism began in 1962, when the USAF stationed him at Edwards AFB in Southern California, where he served honorably as a flightline mechanic for four years before attending college.

Passion-based reporting, such as covering NASCAR events, complements Jordan’s career, although his main desire has been to educate students on issues that affect them. When Jordan taught Communications Law, he would ask his students about a contemporary First Amendment issue in this way: “What truth do you trust to make this decision?” If the basis of truth was the Establishment Clause, Jordan would then ask the students, “Have you researched that basis of truth the same way religious people research theirs?”

Jordan used these questions to highlight that religion relies on the ongoing study of historical documents to determine modern-day truth and that First Amendment truth should receive similar scrutiny. “In order to trust in First Amendment truth, it must first be examined at its foundation,” Jordan emphasized.

“Jefferson and Madison are key figures to consider when understanding the intent of the Establishment Clause,” Jordan said, explaining the firm trust our nation placed in their reasoning when drafting the Clause. Jordan believes a deeper understanding of Thomas Jefferson is needed to recapture his vision of the ‘wall’ meant to separate church and state.

Thomas Jefferson argued in 1786, when Virginia passed its Religious Freedom Statute, that truth in government and religion can prevail only if left to its own devices. He said a “Wall of Separation” was needed between them to ensure they remain isolated for truth’s sake (1802, letter to the Southern Baptist Convention). Below is a chart, scaled in years, showing governmental support for or demolition of ‘Jefferson’s Wall.’

Jordan points out prior to this ‘wall,’ before the U.S. Constitution, each state set its own church-state separation guidelines. Jefferson and Madison considered all of these states, especially Massachusetts. There, they saw how religious influence in government courts led to the Salem Witch Trials less than a century earlier. Undermining due process was their trust in God, which demanded belief in angels—and demons as well. 14 women and five men were hanged, reflecting the court’s belief that women were more susceptible to demonic influence because ‘Eve ate the apple’ was evidence they trusted God for. Currently, in five states, “In God We Trust” is displayed in its courts, reflecting the same Religion.

Religion mixed with government destroyed the town of Salem (now Danvers) and discredited religious faith—the same faith that changed our nation’s motto to “In God We Trust” from “Out of Many, One” in 1956, 263 years after the Salem Witch Trials. Jordan stoically asserted, “This was enough time for our nation to forget, so it could repeat.” The Trial’s aftershock removed “In God We Trust” rhetoric rather than further promoting it on the state seal. Why are so many state seals currently promoting this motto in courthouses and public buildings?

Jordan said, “Our intelligence is being insulted—religion is being used for votes.” He explained that a popular religious vote can solidify an election. “I remember Gov. George Wallace saying he lost his bid for governor because he did not have the KKK vote, and that he would not make that mistake again.” Jordan also remembers the KKK rallies and their banners, one of which read, “We go to Church. Do you?”

Southern states and their churches were strongly opposed to desegregation when the court ordered them to desegregate. Their counter-opposition tactics hinged on religion, which they claimed was the supreme ‘law of the land,’ with the KKK serving as enforcers and ‘witch trial’ prosecutors. This religious alliance aggressively supported separatists’ causes, including Jim Crow Laws, the “In God We Trust” Act, and the Southern Manifesto.

In 1956, along with the “In God We Trust” Act, the church/KKK alliance was the primary sponsor of the “Southern Manifesto,” which was signed by 101 congressmen who denounced the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The congressmen and their constituents promised to use "all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision [Brown] which is contrary to the Constitution and to prevent the use of force in its implementation."

The first action taken by the ‘manifesto signing’ congressmen in the 84th Congress was to pass “In God We Trust” as our Nation’s motto. President Eisenhower had no choice but to sign it because the nation was in a Cold War against an atheistic East. The common social phrase, “Better Dead than Red,” relied heavily on the belief that “In God We Trust” was true.

During most of our nation’s development, there were few Establishment Clause issues. What catalyst made it suddenly contentious during the Civil Rights era?

“Religion became a tool used in racial issues,” Col. (Ret.) USAF Don Bohler said. He believes race relations has been a primary issue affecting America, with religion used to support opposing ideologies. Col. Bohler grew up in Atlanta, Georgia (1939-1961), graduated from Georgia Tech. University in Mechanical Engineering, and received a 2nd Lt. USAF commission. He commented on religious influence in local government at the time:

“It was quite common then for a church deacon who happened to be in law enforcement to also be a member of the KKK.”

Col. Bohler attributes such church-state integration to producing fallout in our education system, where it often does, as highlighted recently by the Charlie Kirk assassination. “The military is protected from religious or political influence by serving the office of the President, not by political or religious affiliation—our universities should be given this same protection,” Col. Bohler said, considering the impact of Turning Point USA on higher education campuses.

Turning Point chapters are distinct from other religious organizations on campus. First, they are shot at. Statistically, the reason a traditional Jehovah's Witness was not shot first was Turning Point’s religious integration with the popular government. The CSU Turning Point chapter often endures snarls and curses from other students at tabling events. Anything beyond a table, while wearing MAGA gear, results in police reports and chaos.

The best example of church-state integration on campus is set by the Jehovah’s Witnesses: they are always present, willing to share their faith only if asked, and nonpolitical. Jehovah’s Witnesses also do not get paid to stand there offering “Free Bible Courses,” assuming a student has the extra time. Other religious organizations get paid to be present on campus.

Liam Gee is paid part-time by a Christian nonprofit to engage with CSU students. He promotes discussion by displaying a question on a standing poster board. This week, a question was “What religion is best for the world?” Gee’s questions prompted passersby to checkmark their religion, except for Shawn Lantz, a young CSU environmental engineering student.

Lantz questioned the need for religion in the world and said, “In fact, it makes me sad--sad to think people would devote their entire lives to something that could be wrong.” Lantz exemplifies the best of CSU by promoting civil discussion on campus. He admonished one student for making circular arguments that always ended with the student saying, “You’re stupid,” to the religious group.

Gee explained why the primary response to his question was Christianity, even though he acknowledged his respondents were biased. He noted that Jesus affirms our Constitution’s Establishment Clause. “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s,” Gee declared, arguing that Jesus supports church-state separation.

“Jesus did not want the government’s influence or sponsorship in any way. He showed us this when he became physically angry, overturning the currency exchangers’ tables,” Gee said.

Gee explained that Jesus wasn’t there to argue for better exchange rates or to move the exchange business at least 500 ft from the synagogue. The only remaining rational explanation for Jesus's actions was the integration of state (currency) into the religious realm. Gee said, “This obscured his message of heaven, where governmental institutions don’t apply.” Other paid promoters of Jesus’s message on campus echoed Gee’s sentiments.

Halle Motley is the Campus Outreach Director for Stories of Antisemitism and graduated from CSU last year. Still looking like a bright student, she enjoys spending a nice day on the student plaza with her coworker David, chatting with her former contemporaries. She didn’t feel comfortable quoting Jesus on the Establishment Clause, and David humorously suggested it was because of her lack of knowledge of scripture. Motley finally commented:

“Jesus was concerned with integrating people’s souls into a kingdom afterlife, not with integrating them into the government of this world.”

David (25) agreed with Motley (25) and cited Jesus’s admonishment to the Sadducees and Pharisees about their involvement in government. David is well-versed in scripture and its history, and he backs this up with confidence. He has found his passion in photography and no longer needs “a paper to hang on the wall.” David can learn from other students, just as he hopes to impart knowledge to them. This dynamic is a key process in the development of social truth. The integration of church and state degrades this process, isolating civil discussion. Isolation promotes internal ideologies based on selective news and social media, further promoting personal and extreme views. The modern-day 24/7 media promotion of extreme-viewpoint content did not exist during the print age.

“The ‘Fairness Doctrine’ that existed in print dictated that both sides be presented,” Jordan explained. He further clarified how the FCC adopted this for radio and television broadcasting and how everything changed during the internet revolution. “I taught journalism through the analog and digital transition—the fairness doctrine was lost along the way.” CSU Journalism Professor David Wolgang agrees.

Dr. David Wolfgang currently teaches the ‘Fairness Doctrine’ in Communications Law at CSU and describes the regulations governing a finite media landscape before the internet and the infinite one that is difficult to regulate now. Holding a Juris Doctorate, Dr. Wolfgang expressed his views on the current Supreme Court posture concerning the Establishment Clause. “Of interest is Alito’s arguments about religious elements,” Dr. Wolfgang said, referring to Justice Samuel Alito’s attempts to define or categorize religion. Justice Alito can best be described as having a judgeship that has jumped over the ‘wall.’

Dr. Wolfgang reviewed the poll results, which served as a source for this story. He believed the 10 students polled were representative of the broader CSU student population. The poll indicates a progressive posture that Justice Black echoed from our founders in Everson v. Board of Education: “Doubtless their goal has not been entirely reached; but so far has the Nation moved toward it…no ‘law respecting an establishment of religion.’"

Jordan highlights this case today, one that first affected him at age five, as affirmation to build a stronger ‘wall’, a fundamental viewpoint held by our founders of the Constitution, in which God, Jesus, or Christianity is not included. “Most importantly,” Jordan concluded, “They understood the inverse correlation between church and state boundaries: increasing ‘In God We Trust’ in government decreases individual due process and other civil liberties.” Jordan believes “this is why a ‘wall’ must separate the two, not a fence.”

Opinion Poll and Graphs

10 CSU students, representing all sides, were given an eight-question survey about social issues affected by the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.

The multiple-choice questions identified those who support a government separated from religion, those who accept integration across all religions, and those who accept integration only for the nation’s primary religion.

Below are the highest-weighted poll responses for each question, grouped by social category.

The data supports a progressively shielded government, with respect for religion given for the sake of education and the military. Religion in schooling is highlighted as the most contentious issue, with strong support across the spectrum. Bilateral support on social issues is also indicated.