Published August 7, 2026 at 10:00 AM ET · Updated August 8, 2026 at 4:57 PM ET
Texas classroom Bible curriculum draws liberal opposition
1 independent outlet is covering this story, first reported here by Washington Examiner. Verification: Watching (how we verify). Every headline links to the original reporting.
A Bible curriculum for Texas classrooms has drawn opposition from liberal critics. The program has become a point of contention.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 1 d ago, when Washington Examiner reported it. So far this remains a single-source report. The most recent report came 1 d ago from Washington Examiner.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
School District of Abington Township v. Schempp held that state-mandated Bible reading as a religious exercise violates the Establishment Clause. Kennedy v. Bremerton replaced Lemon with a history-and-tradition inquiry but left Schempp intact, so a Texas curriculum functioning as devotional instruction would still fail while a genuinely secular academic treatment may survive.
School District of Abington Township v. Schempp 374 U.S. 203 (1963)
Vote: 8-1
State-mandated daily Bible reading and recitation of the Lord's Prayer in public schools are religious exercises that violate the Establishment Clause, applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, notwithstanding excusal provisions; government must maintain strict neutrality, neither aiding nor opposing religion. The opinion articulated the secular purpose / primary effect inquiry later folded into Lemon.
Kennedy v. Bremerton School District 597 U.S. 507 (2022)
Vote: 6-3
The Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses protect an individual engaging in personal religious observance from government reprisal; the district could not discipline Kennedy for quiet post-game midfield prayers offered while not engaged in official duties, and could not justify the discipline by Establishment Clause fears. The Court stated it had 'long ago abandoned Lemon and its endorsement test offshoot,' and that Establishment Clause questions are instead resolved by reference to 'historical practices and understandings.'
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
