Trump-Appointed Judge Struck Down Minnesota Law Discriminating Against Religious Freedom

In Minnesota, something fundamental to American liberty came under assault when state bureaucrats decided religious institutions hindered their progressive vision.

The target was not just brick-and-mortar buildings or dusty theology textbooks: it was the very right of families to choose education that aligns with their deepest convictions.

For forty years, Minnesota’s Postsecondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) program operated as intended, allowing high school students to earn college credits at institutions of their choice, including faith-based schools. This was not controversial; it was common sense. Religious colleges like Crown College and the University of Northwestern-St. Paul served thousands of Minnesota families, receiving millions in state funding through the program.

These institutions were not hiding their mission—they openly required students to share their religious values, just as they had for decades. But something shifted in 2023. When Democrats gained control of both houses of the Minnesota legislature, they finally achieved what the state’s Department of Education had been attempting since 2019:

[T]he systematic exclusion

of religious schools from public programs.

The new amendment banned any institution requiring a “faith statement” from participating in PSEO, having forced religious colleges into an impossible choice: abandon your core beliefs or lose access to public benefits your students’ families help fund through their taxes. Last Friday, however, that progressive overreach met its match in the form of U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel, a Trump appointee who understood what Minnesota’s politicians apparently forgot:

[T]he First Amendment still means something.

Thus:

[Judge Brasel’s] ruling was unequivocal and

devastating to the state’s discriminatory scheme.

From Daily Caller:

If the Schools’ eligibility to participate in PSEO is conditioned on not using faith statements as an admissions requirement, their free exercise in maintaining a campus community of like‐minded believers is burdened.

Likewise, if the Families cannot obtain the public benefit of PSEO reimbursement for their children at a school of their choice of like‐minded believers, their free exercise is also burdened. The Faith Statement Ban is unconstitutional on its face under the Free Exercise Clause.

The judge spoke frankly, and ordered the discriminatory amendments “stricken in its entirety.” This was not merely a technical legal victory.

[This] was a fundamental rejection of the idea

that government can weaponize public benefits

to force religious institutions into ideological compliance.

Minnesota’s Department of Education tried to dress up their discrimination in the language of inclusion, arguing they were protecting students who “are not Christian, straight and cisgender.” But this transparent attempt to pit civil rights against religious freedom fooled no one, least of all Judge Brasel.

The state was not protecting anyone; in fact,

they were punishing religious families for their beliefs.

Diana Thomson from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, who represented the families and schools, called Minnesota’s actions both “unlawful” and “shameful.” She characterized the ruling as “a sharp warning to politicians who target” religious families. This demonstration is cause for We the People to wonder:

[D]o these bureaucrats even read

the Constitution they swore to uphold?

They should all be fired for their disregard of their sworn responsibilities to their constituencies.

Look, these are not abstract constitutional principles. The human cost becomes clear in the words of Mark and Melinda Loe, parents who fought back:

We raise our children to put their faith at the center of their lives. Minnesota tried to take that right away from us.

These are real families facing real consequences when their government decides their beliefs make them second-class citizens.

NOTE: This victory reveals something larger about our current moment. The Left’s hostility toward religious education is not random or isolated—it is systematic and intentional. Those of the communist/globalist crime syndicate understand independent religious institutions represent a threat to their monopoly on shaping young minds.

When parents can choose schools that reinforce their values rather than undermine them, the progressive project of cultural transformation loses its captive audience. And that terrifies [the Left].

But what should give all of Conservatism hope: Our constitutional system, when properly defended by judges who understand their role, still works. Every Trump-appointed judge who stands up for religious liberty represents a guardian at the gate, protecting freedoms that previous generations took for granted.

This Minnesota ruling is not merely a win for a few Christian colleges. It is a reminder that the war on faith can be fought and won, one courtroom at a time. The Left thought they could quietly strangle religious education while no one was watching. They were wrong.