The recent pandemic has proven that the Essential Fight for religious liberty in America extends beyond legal court battles. There’s an equally important fight happening outside the courtroom, such as in the halls of U.S. Congress, where First Liberty continues to keep a vigilant eye on important policies and developments that could advance, or restrict, our first and most fundamental freedom.

Womaniacal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi—another Democrat leader with compromised cognitive abilities and no moral principles—has womanaged to womangle her first day of the new congressional session.

“Progressives” are variously amused, baffled, or outraged by talks percolating around the Internet about secession, viewing it as not only impracticable but also wacky. If, however, leftists would take just a few moments from their narcissistic, navel-gazing search for their authentic selves, which often involve strange sexual preoccupations, to really listen to conservatives, maybe they could understand why many conservatives no longer want to live under the progressively tyrannical rule of “progressives” who self-identify as open-minded, tolerant, and compassionate even as they seek to destroy fundamental rights and institutions.

What many pastors and Christians are twisting Romans 13 and 1 Pet. 2 to mean is laughable, I mean, literally. That’s what God does with kings and nations that use their power to plot against God and His anointed (and that includes His people and their freedom). God laughs (Ps. 2:4). So Christians should laugh too.

Though formally titled the "Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act," the $2-$3 trillion Heroes Act is much more than a relief package. It bails out mismanaged Democrat-led cities and states on the taxpayer's dime, making Americans pay for the incompetence and overreach of Democratic leadership.

Illinois Family Institute has joined a friend of the court ("amicus") brief supporting Catholic Social Services in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, which was just argued before the U.S. Supreme Court.

At the federal level, the courts generally enforce this amendment by requiring 1) a compelling government interest, and 2) the least restrictive means narrowly tailored to actually achieve that interest (called the strict scrutiny test), before allowing a government to infringe Constitutional rights.

The idea of expanding the size of the U.S. Supreme Court, also known as “court packing,” has surfaced once again, as it did after the Brett Kavanaugh appointment. Often mentioned is a proposal by Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of University of California Berkeley’s Law School. He favors increasing the size of the court to 13 instead of its current nine. There are other calls for a larger court, such as those produced by organizations like “Take Back the Court” and “Demand Justice.”

Still reaching for peak absurdity with ever more zeal, elements of the radical left are now smearing an honest interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and those who support it as “racist,” “sexist,” “homophobic,” and more. In fact, those are the...

Nearly a month after calling Christians to the nation’s capital for a prayer march, Franklin Graham is calling on them again, this time to join him for a day of prayer and fasting. The IFI board of directors and staff will heed this call, and we intentionally fast and pray for our state and nation this Sunday.

Well, they dusted off those colorful “Handmaid’s Tale” outfits that were so visible at Brett Kavanaugh’s SCOTUS confirmation hearings in 2018.  

Illinois’ feckless U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth opposes the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the U. S. Supreme Court because Barrett signed a 2006 newspaper ad sponsored by an Indiana pro-life organization that said, "We, the following citizens of Michiana, oppose abortion on demand and defend the right to life from fertilization to natural death. Please continue to pray to end abortion." In an October 2nd letter to her Senate colleagues, Duckworth said the pro-life organization whose ad Barrett signed 14 years ago opposes, "a critical step of the in-vitro fertilization (IVF) process that gave me my children."

Duckworth conveniently omitted what that critical step is.

Last Saturday, President Trump nominated U.S. Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat held by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the U.S. Supreme Court. Barrett, 48, has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit since October 2017. While there may be much dissent across political lines over the confirmation of Judge Barrett for the U.S. Supreme Court, the facts of her extensive qualifications speak for themselves.

The United States Constitution's Article 2, Sec. 2, cl. 2, provides that the president of the United States "shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States." President Donald Trump has nominated Amy Coney Barrett as U.S. Supreme Court justice who will replace the late Ruth Bader Ginsberg.