Kansas Legislature Stands Up for Free Speech, Life, and Families with Laws Similar to Arkansas’

The Kansas Legislature made headlines recently by overriding Governor Laura Kelly’s vetoes of several important bills — such as bills protecting free speech on college campuses, defunding Planned Parenthood, strengthening women’s informed consent laws, and expanding education freedom for families.

All of these measures are similar to good laws Arkansas has enacted over the years.

The Kansas Intellectual Rights and Knowledge Act — the KIRK Act — protects students at public colleges and universities from being censored for their beliefs. Under the law, students are free to engage in speech and expressive activities on campus without fear of punishment for holding the “wrong” viewpoint. The measure is similar to laws Arkansas has enacted in the past.

Public universities are supposed to be places where ideas are freely exchanged. But in recent years, students and faculty with traditional or Christian viewpoints have increasingly found themselves silenced. As our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom have said, this kind of viewpoint-based censorship is a clear violation of the First Amendment.

Government should not be in the business of picking which ideas are acceptable and which ones must be silenced.

The Kansas Legislature also voted to keep taxpayer dollars away from Planned Parenthood. That is exactly the right call.

Arkansans have long agreed that their tax dollars should not subsidize the abortion industry, and Arkansas law reflects that.

On education, Kansas lawmakers passed the Education Freedom Tax Credit, which lets families choose a school that reflects their values rather than being locked into a government-run school. That is a commonsense parental rights measure, and it mirrors the kind of education freedom Arkansas has worked to expand through its own Educational Freedom Account program under the 2023 LEARNS Act.

Arkansas has consistently been a leader when it comes to protecting free speech, the free exercise of religion, and the right to life. It’s good to see other state legislatures doing the same.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.

Louisville Pays $800K After Trying to Silence Christian Photographer

Last month a Kentucky city learned a costly lesson about the First Amendment.

Our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom report Louisville has agreed to pay $800,000 in attorneys’ fees after a federal court ruled the city violated the constitutional rights of Christian photographer Chelsey Nelson. Louisville’s “Fairness Ordinance” tried to force Nelson to photograph same-sex weddings and prohibited her from explaining her religious beliefs about marriage on her own studio’s website. The court said no — and now the city is paying for it.

We have written before about Christian photographers, bakers, florists, and wedding chapel owners being dragged into court because they declined to take part in same-sex weddings or ceremonies. Time and again, courts have had to remind government officials that the First Amendment means what it says.

Nelson’s victory builds on the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 2023 ruling in 303 Creative v. Elenis, which held that the government cannot force artists to create speech they disagree with. The government cannot compel Americans to say things they don’t believe — and it certainly cannot punish them for saying what they do believe.

People should be free to live and operate according to their deeply held religious convictions.

Arkansas has enacted some of the best protections for religious freedom in the country. But cases like Chelsey Nelson’s are a reminder that those protections must be defended — in court if necessary. We are grateful for organizations like Alliance Defending Freedom that are willing to fight for them.

Louisville’s $800,000 bill proves that violating the Constitution is an expensive mistake.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.

FDIC Bans “Reputation Risk” Policies Used to De-Bank Conservatives

Last week the FDIC issued a final rule eliminating “reputation risk” policies that financial institutions used as an excuse to debank conservatives.

Individuals and organizations rely on banks and other financial institutions every day, and they expect these institutions to serve everyone regardless of their religious convictions or political positions.

But over the past five years, congressional testimony and news stories have highlighted how federal officials and financial institutions targeted conservative organizations through debanking.

Conservatives deemed “high risk” could have their bank accounts closed without warning and without explanation

Late last year, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency released a report confirming that America’s nine largest banks systematically debanked customers over their political beliefs.

The OCC’s preliminary findings showed that between 2020 and 2023, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bank, Capital One, PNC Bank, TD Bank, and BMO Bank all maintained policies restricting access to banking services for certain industries.

During the Biden Administration, the U.S. Treasury Department gave financial institutions an analysis titled, “Bankrolling Bigotry” that listed legitimate, conservative groups such as Alliance Defending Freedom, the American College of Pediatricians, American Family Association, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, Liberty Counsel, National Organization for Marriage, and the Ruth Institute as “Hate Groups” alongside the KKK and the American Nazi Party.

We also now know the U.S. Treasury Department gave banks and other financial institutions guidance that encouraged them to comb through transactions for terms like “Bass Pro Shops,” “Cabela’s,” and “Dick’s Sporting Goods” when looking for “Homegrown Violent Extremism.”

However, last week the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued a final executive rule that prohibits financial institutions from debanking conservatives.

The FDIC’s official summary of the rule says:

“Among other things, the rule prohibits the agencies from criticizing or taking adverse action against an institution on the basis of reputation risk. The rule also prohibits the agencies from requiring, instructing, or encouraging an institution to close an account, to refrain from providing an account, product, or service, or to modify or terminate any product or service on the basis of a person or entity’s political, social, cultural, or religious views or beliefs, constitutionally protected speech, or solely on the basis of politically disfavored but lawful business activities perceived to present reputation risk.”

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Vice President of Corporate Engagement Jeremy Tedesco issued a statement in response to the new rule, saying:

“The FDIC and OCC’s new rule prohibiting the use of ‘reputation risk’ helps close the book on a shameful period where regulators abused their power to threaten law-abiding Americans through their financial institutions. The American people deserve a financial system that provides fair access for everyone, regardless of political or religious viewpoints. Recent history teaches us that regulators have all too often weaponized ‘reputation risk’ to punish viewpoints they disfavor. Americans should have a regulatory system that focuses instead on protecting banks’ safety and soundness, and this move is a big step toward that goal. Alliance Defending Freedom commends the Trump administration, and especially the leadership of the FDIC and OCC, for doing their part to ensure a fair financial system for all Americans.”

This is good news. In 2021 Family Council’s credit card processor — a company owned by JPMorgan Chase — terminated our account after designating our organization as “high risk.”

At 10:29 AM on Wednesday, July 7, 2021, our office received a terse email from our credit card processor saying, “Unfortunately, we can no longer support your business. We wish you all the luck in the future, and hope that you find a processor that better fits your payment processing needs.”

Within 60 seconds, Family Council could no longer accept donations online. The processor never explained why we were labeled “high risk.” All we can do is speculate that our conservative principles and our public policy work might have had something to do with the decision to close our account.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. Other organizations have had similar experiences as well.

It’s worth pointing out that last year, President Trump signed an executive order to protect fair banking for all Americans, and JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America have taken steps to prevent politically motivated debanking.

Family Council is grateful to the many people and organizations who have stood up against debanking in recent years. After all, banks that are too big to fail are also too big to discriminate.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.