Alerts Sign-up
The United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued a memorandum on July 28, 2025, titled “Protecting Religious Expression in the Federal Workplace.” The document emphasizes the rights of federal workers to religious freedom as outlined in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Concerns have been raised about how these protections are being interpreted and applied. Critics argue that current policies may favor Christianity over other religions. They point out that while religious freedom is guaranteed for all, recent efforts appear to prioritize Christian beliefs within federal institutions.
“While this effort may appear to address certain forms of stigma against Christians, particularly against Catholics, in reality it will weaponize a narrow understanding of religious freedom to legitimize discrimination against marginalized groups like the LGBTQ community, infringe on our reproductive freedom, and hurt our society’s most vulnerable.”
There have been ongoing debates about whether attempts to identify the United States as a Christian nation align with constitutional principles. The executive order issued on February 6, 2025, titled Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias, claimed that Christians were targeted by previous administrations. However, Interfaith Alliance refuted these claims and stated there is no evidence of widespread anti-Christian bias in the country. They also said that promoting such claims is offensive when compared to actual Christian persecution occurring internationally.
The U.S. is home to many religions—some estimates suggest more than 4,000 worldwide—including Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and Judaism. Although Christianity remains dominant in America at about 67% of the population, its numbers are declining over time and practices within Christianity itself vary widely.
The OPM memo from Scott Kupor outlines types of employee conduct related to religion that should not result in disciplinary action. This includes allowing employees to discuss religious topics at work and even attempt to persuade others about their own views as long as such actions are not harassing.
At issue for some critics is language suggesting supervisors can engage in such conversations with those they supervise: “The constitutional rights of supervisors to engage in such conversations should not be distinguished from non-supervisory employees by the nature of their supervisory roles.” Some believe this could create power imbalances or pressure for employees who do not share their supervisor’s beliefs.
These developments follow a broader push by the Trump administration—now six months into its term—to expand religion’s role within federal workplaces. Critics say this threatens religious freedoms for federal workers who are not Christians.
In response to concerns over religious favoritism and division, the United Church of Christ General Synod passed a resolution in 2019 supporting interfaith dialogue and denouncing violence or hatred based on religious identity. The statement called on church leaders and members “to deplore and denounce any and all acts of violence and hatred, be they in thought, word, or deed, directed at individuals and communities, particularly when based on religious identity; and to offer a public witness of support and solidarity when such acts are perpetrated.”
Supporters stress that protecting everyone’s right to practice their faith—or none—is essential across all settings including government workplaces. Critics maintain that recent policy shifts may privilege one tradition over others.
