Search

When the government discriminates against foster/adoptive parents based on their religious beliefs, children are harmed. These kids need a forever home—not political ideology. Christians and the church have been key to providing resources and open arms to vulnerable children for hundreds of years. The earliest orphanages in North America were created by dedicated Christian groups, and these faithful people continue to lead the way today. Yet, some state officials now reject Christian and other religious families—forcing children to wait longer for a loving home—because they disagree with the ...

What is happening? At a time when the need to provide children with a stable and loving home is at a point of “crisis,” many states are forcing adoptive parents to pass an ideological litmus test to qualify. In some states, if the parents aren’t willing to push the government’s message on sexuality and gender, they can’t adopt. Simply put: government officials and policies are actively discriminating against Americans of faith—prioritizing ideology over the needs of kids. That’s cruel, it harms children, and it’s unconstitutional. Who is harmed? Nearly 400,000 children are currently in the ...

Now there’s no doubt. Detailed information released this week by the U.S. House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government makes plain that the Biden administration has been partnering with major banks and payment processors to censor non-profit ministries and threaten the freedom of everyday Americans. And now, the subcommittee has revealed that the government has targeted Alliance Defending Freedom. We’ve been unlawfully swept up in the federal government’s “domestic terrorist” dragnet. While ADF was advocating on behalf of the freedom of EVERY American to live ...

… S. Oldham of the 5th Circuit, the Hon. Nathan L. Hecht, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas, and the Hon. …

… speech and religious liberty in collaboration with the chief legal counsel and litigation team directors. As the … and in the public square, including Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission , 303 Creative v. Elenis , and Brush & Nib Studio v. Phoenix , which Scruggs …

… preserving the freedoms of speech and religion. In NIFLA v. Becerra he was part of the Supreme Court team that … being forced to refer for abortion. In Women’s Health Link v. City of Ft. Wayne, Ind. , Theriot defended the freedom of … Wade . In Kelvin Cochran v. City of Atlanta , he defended Chief Cochran’s free speech rights from government …

Allison Pope serves as legal counsel for the Center for Life at Alliance Defending Freedom, where she defends pro-life laws and organizations. Before joining ADF, Pope was an associate at a large law firm in Kansas City, Missouri. In that role, she represented major pharmaceutical and automotive companies in class actions and other complex litigation. Pope also has experience in the clinical research industry. Pope served as a law clerk for Judge Eric E. Murphy on the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. She graduated magna cum laude from Notre Dame Law School and earned her ...

… electrical businesses in the United States, designing and manufacturing electrical control panels for automation and …

… and has served the organization since 1977. He is also chief of staff in the Office of the President. Rogers’ …

Bryan Neihart serves as legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, where he is a member of the Center for Conscience Initiatives.