The US government recently released a report that alleges the previous Biden Administration may be guilty of religious discrimination in general and anti-Christian bias in particular.
Were the faceless men and women behind the most powerful auto-pen in the world ideologically opposed to people of faith?
Pursuant to Executive Order 14202, a report titled Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias with the Federal Government, was released on April 30, 2026. The 200-page report contains no less than 14 key findings, with a further 300-pages of evidence for its conclusions.
If you’ve made it this far in the article then congratulations, for my fear is that some people will have not read anything beyond the thumbnail and have already begun typing a scathing response on why the Presidency of Donald Trump is illegitimate. Ironically, the very people who recently gave King Charles a standing ovation are the very ones who most vocally support the ‘No Kings’ movement.
Before I go on though, it’s important to reflect upon the precise historical understanding on the separation of Church and State. This is because rather than excluding religion from the public square – something our forefathers would never have intended, let alone imagined – the US and Australian Constitutions were designed to protect the State from intruding upon the Church.
Just consider the following quote by America’s founding president, George Washington, and especially how he understood the role of Church and State to be complementary rather than contradictory. As Stephen Chavura, John Gascoigne, and Ian Tregenza argue in their book, Reason, Religion and Australian Polity: A Secular State? (Routledge, 2019), exactly the same case could be made for the Australian situation as well.
‘Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion, and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labour to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on the minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.’
George Washington, Farewell Address (1796)
How tragic then that just a couple of centuries later a report like this had to be written, and that was largely in response to what are, in my opinion, the decidedly anti-Christian policies of the Joe Biden Administration despite the former President professing to be a practising Roman Catholic.
Fourteen Key Findings
The findings of the report are as extensive as they are shocking. Here is a quick list of what they found, with a short example, involving three key areas: Enforcement Actions, Federal Policy, and Adverse Employment Actions.
First, ‘Enforcement Actions’.
Key Finding 1: The report alleges the Biden DOJ pursued aggressive prosecutions against non-violent, prolife, Christian demonstrators under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act but responded less aggressively to violent attacks against pregnancy resource centres.
‘As detailed in the recent DOJ report, “The Biden Administration’s Weaponisation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act,”2 the Biden DOJ operated as an enforcement arm for abortion non-governmental organisations (NGOs), especially National Abortion Federation, Planned Parenthood, and Feminist Majority Foundation. The Biden DOJ was in routine contact with these NGOs and the abortion clinics they represented but mostly disregarded pro-life groups. In most prosecutions, abortion NGOs alerted the Biden DOJ to pro-life activities and gathered evidence at DOJ’s request. Abortion NGOs prepared dossiers on Christian, pro-life advocates, including photographs and personal information about the advocates’ children. The NGOs also alerted the Civil Rights Division to their protests, rallies, and social media posts, so that the Biden DOJ could search for chargeable offences.’
Key Finding 2: It is alleged by the report that the Biden Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigated, monitored, tracked, and scrutinised traditional Catholics who had engaged in no criminal misconduct.
‘FBI’s Richmond, Virginia, Field Office was at the forefront of this effort. It justified its actions through misplaced reliance on baseless allegations from the Southern Poverty Law Centre and the religious affiliation of a single law enforcement target who happened to identify himself as a “radical traditional Catholic.” In response, the Richmond Field Office conducted a low-level investigation of the target’s local church and began to consider traditional Catholics as potential violent extremists or domestic terrorists based on their preferred popes, devotion to the Traditional Latin Mass, and views on abortion, immigration, and human sexuality.’
Key Finding 3: The report suggests the Biden Internal Revenue Service (IRS) may have investigated churches because of what their pastors preached and Christian organisations because they applied biblical teachings to daily life.
‘Churches and Christian non-profits have alleged that the Biden IRS failed to apply the Johnson Amendment in a viewpoint-neutral manner, appearing to investigate Christians whose religious values aligned with conservative political views, while appearing to ignore open endorsements of liberal candidates at other churches. In one matter, the Biden IRS denied a Christian organisation’s application for tax-exempt status because its “Bible teachings are typically affiliated with the [Republican] party and candidates. This disqualifies you from exemption under IRC Section 501(c)(3).”’
Key Finding 4: The Biden Department of Education (ED) may have, according to the report, focused its enforcement actions against Christian universities, levying enormous fines that dwarfed the penalties for university-related sexual assaults.
‘The Biden ED fined Grand Canyon University $37.7 million over tuition cost reporting. Then-Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona, stated ED is “cracking down” on the university “not only to shut them down, but [also] to send a message not to prey on students.” Federal courts and Arizona regulators found no such issues. The Biden ED also investigated Liberty University under the Clery Act, a law that requires annual security reports about campus crime statistics. Liberty University ultimately paid a $14 million fine.’
Key Finding 5: The Biden Health and Human Services (HHS) and DOJ appeared to scale back ongoing enforcement efforts to vindicate conscience rights, withdrawing a notice of violation against a university medical centre after it coerced a Christian nurse into participating in an abortion despite her religious objections.
‘The Biden DOJ viewed this matter as an immediate priority. The Biden HHS ultimately resolved the matter through “technical assistance” rather than enforcement. But the practical effect for the complainant was the same: A Christian nurse who was coerced into performing an elective abortion did not receive a meaningful federal remedy, and the contours of conscience protections in such circumstances were left unresolved.’
Second, ‘Federal Policy’.
Key Finding 6: The Biden Administration was arguably one of the loudest supporters of a congressional proposal that would eliminate religious protections for Christians and other religions that hold traditional social values.
‘Although it was not enacted, the Biden Administration’s sustained advocacy revealed how willing the Biden Administration was to eradicate religious rights to promote other policy goals.’
Key Finding 7: Even though Congress rejected a similar attempt, the Biden Administration tried to mandate the adoption of its views on sexual orientation and gender ideology, with limited religious exceptions, according to the report.
‘When courts made clear that HHS (Health and Human Services) must offer religious accommodations, HHS pivoted to a burdensome case-by-case analysis, in which it could consider any perceived harm inflicted by religious exemptions on third parties – a process that could appear to offer illusory protection to those seeking to act in accordance with their faith. The Biden Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) likewise dismissed sincerely held religious beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity as “discrimination in hiring … cloaked as religious practice.” It adopted similar guidance for workplaces, requiring employers to provide access to bathrooms and locker rooms based on gender identity, without meaningful exceptions. The Biden ED, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Department of Labor (DOL), and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) each implemented similar policies, coercing compliance through threats of losing access to government programs and benefits.’
Key Finding 8: According to the report, the Biden HHS appeared to take multiple steps, driven by its approach to gender dysphoria and same-sex attraction, to prevent Christian families from living out their religious beliefs.
‘In 2022, the Biden HHS issued guidance memoranda and a final rule, preventing foster children from being placed with Christian foster families or Christian foster agencies that, because of conflicts with their faith, insufficiently affirmed the Biden Administration’s views on sexual orientation and gender ideology…
‘The Biden Administration also took steps to limit Christian families from seeking therapy from like-minded therapists on matters of sexual orientation and gender ideology.’
Key Finding 9: The Biden Administration appeared to take a dismissive approach to conscience rights and religious accommodation rights on the issue of abortion.
‘The Biden HHS issued guidance to healthcare providers on their obligations to provide abortions under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. The guidance asserted obligations regardless of state laws and did not mention conscience protections available to individual providers.’
Key Finding 10: The Biden Administration may have sidelined Christians in favour of their preferred constituencies.
‘On Good Friday, President Biden issued a proclamation announcing “Transgender Day of Visibility,” which was to be celebrated on Easter Sunday. Additionally, numerous federal agencies excluded Christians from their outreach…At the Biden DOJ, the Civil Rights Division issued a brochure that excluded Christians from the list of possible victims of actionable discrimination.’
Key Finding 11: The Biden Administration is accused by the report of ignoring human rights crises that affected Christians.
‘The Biden State Department removed Nigeria from its list of countries of particular concern for religious freedom, despite acknowledging ongoing murder, kidnapping, and persecution of Nigerian Christians.’
Key Finding 12: It is alleged the Biden Administration denied Christians and faith-based organisations equal access to government services, benefits, and programs.
‘The Biden Administration undertook a multi-agency rulemaking that broadly burdened faith-based organisations’ access to federal funds and public programs. Under the Biden Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) and Small Business Administration (SBA) limited Christians’ access to federal economic relief, disaster assistance, security grants, and food programs.’
Third, ‘Adverse Employment Actions’.
Key Finding 13: The report suggests the Biden agencies’ religious accommodation process often functionally penalised Christians who sought to exercise their religious rights.
‘The Task Force compiled several case studies of the types of adverse employment actions taken against employees who requested religious exemptions. Some saw their promotion opportunities rescinded or lost security clearances. Some were demoted or deemed ineligible for promotion. Others were reprimanded, denied pay and benefits, prohibited from completing necessary training, and even physically banned from the office or outdoor work activities.’
Key Finding 14: It is alleged Biden Administration may have regulated and suppressed religious speech and curtailed Christians’ ability to jointly worship and study the Bible.
‘In 2023, a Catholic hospital in Oklahoma was told to extinguish the flame of a religious candle or risk losing its participation in Medicare and Medicaid, including Children’s Health Insurance Program funding.’
Anti-Christian Bias More Broadly
The executive summary of the Report also suggested that the presence of anti-Christian bias was widespread. For example:
‘In listening sessions, the Task Force repeatedly heard examples of anti-Christian bias and areas where the First Amendment and statutory promises of religious liberty have not been realised in American communities. This report briefly surveys the types of religious discrimination or unequal treatment impacting Christians through Covid church closures, efforts to force out Christian charities via zoning enforcement, limitations on Christians’ parental rights, coercion of particular viewpoints in public education, and coercion of certain healthcare coverage with limited or no religious exceptions.’
Unfortunately, government responses to Covid from around the world demonstrated the deep level of distrust and even animosity to Christian churches, especially from governments in the West.
What’s Next?
However, the Report does not simply survey the problem of anti-Christian bias as a result of the Biden’s Administration’s policies but also seeks to propose solutions. The most basic of which is by returning to the principles of its founding document. As the Report states:
‘The Administration is changing course on its enforcement efforts, and returning to principles of equal justice under law for all Americans. The fundamentals of our constitutional design are durable and sound, and the American spirit is resilient. The federal government must once again stand as a bulwark against religious discrimination. The First Amendment’s promises are for all, not just Christians. This report concludes with an agency-by-agency compilation of the Task Force’s efforts to remediate its findings and fulfill the promise of religious liberty for all Americans.’
The production of this report should be welcomed by all people of faith and especially Christians. While no one political administration is perfect, it is good to see the religious rights and concerns of Christian citizens in particular being taken seriously.
The Biden Administration may well go down as the most anti-Christian in American history.
All of which to say though, we should sincerely thank God that those irreligious policies are being identified and begun to be overturned. If only the same might now occur in Australia…
