Monday Afternoon, August 21, 2023

UPDATE ON CHRISTIAN NATIONALIST

GOP REP. MIKE TURNER'S NATIONAL

DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT (NDAA)

AMENDMENT TO SHUT MRFF DOWN

Christian nationalist Rep. Mike Turner's blatantly unconstitutional amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to SHUT MRFF DOWN by making it ILLEGAL for members of the military to communicate with or respond to MRFF is now part of the GOP-led House's version of the NDAA, which was passed by the House on July 14 with Turner’s despicable, vindictive,

and unconstitutional amendment still in it.

On July 27, the Senate passed its own version of the NDAA,

which does not contain any language regarding MRFF.

When Congress returns from its August recess, a conference committee made up of both House and Senate members will be appointed to reconcile the two bills. THIS IS WHERE TURNER'S AMENDMENT TO SHUT MRFF DOWN MUST BE REMOVED!!!

If Turner's amendment is allowed to remain in the final, bicameral version of the NDAA, it will obliterate MRFF's ability to protect and advocate on behalf of our service members facing religious discrimination, harassment, and aggressive proselytizing!

If you haven't already, please take a minute to submit our petition letter opposing Turner's amendment to your representative and senators.

MRFF OP-ED

ON DAILY KOS

Trending story on Daily Kos

“I’m Just a Bill” — A bill that'll shut MRFF down if Congress's Christian nationalists get their way

By: MRFF Senior Research Director Chris Rodda

Monday, August 21, 2023

As I wrote in my June 26 and and July 14 posts, Christian nationalist Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2024 that would in effect SHUT DOWN the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) by making it ILLEGAL for members of the military to even communicate with MRFF! 

That amendment was passed by the House Armed Services Committee on June 21. It was sneakily inserted into a large en bloc package of unrelated amendments that were not read and voted on individually but voted on as a package with a simple voice vote, resulting in all the committee’s Democrats voting for it, and the ensuing claim that destroying MRFF is a “bipartisan” effort.

This is the text of Turner’s amendment, which, is allowed to remain in the final, bicameral version of the NDAA and becomes law, it will obliterate MRFF’s ability to protect and advocate on behalf of our service members facing religious discrimination, harassment, and aggressive proselytizing:

LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS RELATED TO MILITARY RELIGIOUS FREEDOM FOUNDATION.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2024 for the Department of Defense may be used—

(1) to communicate with the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, its leadership, or its founder; or

(2) to take any action or make any decision as a result of any claim, objection, or protest made by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation without the authority of the Secretary of Defense. 

This means that if a military commander even responds to an email from MRFF, or makes any decision as a result of being contacted by MRFF, that commander can be charged with violating the UCMJ and potentially face a court-martial! Obviously, needing to get the authority of the Secretary of Defense is a ludicrously impossible and unfeasible thing for commanders at the level that MRFF works with to resolve issues to do.

An amendment to single out and in effect shut down a particular advocacy organization simply because it is disagreeable to Rep. Turner’s, or any other Congress member’s, personal religious ideology has no place in any legislation passed by the United States Congress. It is unconstitutional in several ways. It denies to MRFF and its clients the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and petitioning the government. It is also, by singling out one organization by name for punishment, analogous to a Bill of Attainder, which is prohibited by Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution.

Yes, this is how scared the Christian nationalists in Congress are of MRFF’s success in fighting Christian nationalism in our military. They now see the only way to try to stop us is to make us ILLEGAL for military personnel to communicate with or respond to!

On July 14, after the GOP “anti-woke” brigade adding a slew of amendments the night before — to include book banning in military base schools, prohibiting federal funds from being used for training on diversity, equity, and inclusion, prohibiting federal funds from being used to rename the U.S. military installations named for Confederates, and prohibiting the DoD from paying for or reimbursing expenses for service members who must travel to another state to obtain an abortion due to being stationed in a state where abortions are now illegal — the House passed its version of the NDAA with an essentially party-line vote of 219-210.

Turner’s amendment to shut MRFF down remained in the House’s final version of its NDAA — H.R. 2670.

Meanwhile, in the Senate …

The Senate was working on its own version of the NDAA — S. 2226 — which it passed on July 27.

The Senate version does NOT contain anything regarding MRFF.

Now, here’s where things get a little more complicated than Schoolhouse Rock!

Immediately after passing its own NDAA, the Senate turns around and passes the House’s version “with amendment.” No, this doesn’t mean that the Senate has actually passed the House’s version. The Senate’s “amendment” replaces the entire House version with the entire Senate version. In other words, there is now technically only one bill — H.R. 2670 — but the entire House bill, as returned to the House by the Senate, has been replaced by the Senate’s version. In effect, although the bill now has only the House’s bill number, there are still two versions of the bill, the House’s and the Senate’s.

What happens next …

After Congress returns from its August recess, a Conference Committee, made up of members from both the House and the Senate, will be appointed to reconcile the two versions of the bill.

Since Turner’s amendment to shut MRFF down is only in the House version of the bill, it is the Conference Committee that will decide its fate, and it is imperative to the survival of MRFF that the Conference Committee’s decision is to remove it!

We do not yet know who the members of the Conference Committee are going to be (with the exception of Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was promised a seat on the committee by Kevin McCarthy in exchange for her vote on the House’s NDAA over her objections to its continued support of Ukraine.) This is why we are imploring EVERYONE to send MRFF’s petition letter to their representative and senators to ensure that as many members as possible see it. 

CLICK HERE NOW TO GO TO THE FORM

AND SEND THE LETTER.

And lest you think that sending a letter to your rep and senators is a waste of time, it most certainly isn’t. Representatives and senators have been responding to the letter, which we know because MRFF supporters who have sent it have been sharing their responses with MRFF.

Some, like this one from Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-WA), are encouraging (emphasis added):

Dear Mr. (name withheld),

Thank you for contacting me about religious freedom and our military members. I appreciate you taking the time to share your views with me. I am strongly in support of religious freedom. It is one of the founding principles of our country and a fundamental human right.

Servicemembers and their families continue to inspire me by their dedication and service to our nation. Our region is home to a large Navy installation, numerous Coast Guard stations, and a major Army and Air Force joint base. Much has been asked of the many service members in our region, and they have always responded with courage, ardent loyalty, and genuine hearts for service.

Our country enjoys unparalleled freedom because of the commitment of our troops – a commitment we should return as we continue to support the families of those who have dedicated their lives to protect our nation and the liberties guaranteed under the Constitution. It’s important that policymakers ensure that the religious freedoms of troops are also protected.

With that in mind, I appreciate you sharing your concerns about a new provision in the House passed FY 24 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2670) that would prevent service members from communicating with or taking any actions in response to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. As you may know, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is a private nonprofit group that advocates on behalf of service members on issues of religious freedom within the military. Unfortunately, no amendments were offered to remove this provision when the full House considered the NDAA. I have concerns about the effect of this amendment, and will continue to closely examine this issue. Please know that I will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress continues to work on next year’s NDAA. 

Additionally, numerous amendments were adopted to the House passed NDAA that jeopardized civil rights of servicemembers including efforts to limit access to reproductive freedom and gender affirming medical care for servicemembers and to eliminate funding for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives that ensure the military is an inclusive environment. With that in mind, I opposed the NDAA when it was considered in the House on July 14, 2023. In my view, the bill passed by House Republicans does not reflect the values of the folks I represent.

I encourage you to continue to share your views with me on this topic or any other issue. Thank you for reaching out. It is an honor to serve as your representative.

Sincerely, 

Derek Kilmer 

Member of Congress

This one, however, from Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA), which several people have sent us, contains one sentence that is concerning (emphasis added):

Dear Ms. (name withheld):

Thank you for taking the time to contact me about Section 1045 of H.R. 2670, the House version of the Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) is a nonprofit organization which, according to its website is "dedicated to ensuring that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment."

Some individual and organizations take exception to the views and tactics of the MRFF. In the House version of the NDAA, Representative Mike Turner of Ohio introduced language that would prohibit the Department of Defense from communicating with the MRFF or from making any decision as a result of any claim, objection, or protest made by the MRFF. This language was approved by the House Armed Services Committee and ultimately became Sec.1045 of H.R. 2670. The Senate version of the NDAA, S.2226, does not include these provisions.

As your United States Senator, I support military practices that both embody the ideals of our founding fathers and best enables warfighters to ensure our national security. The inclusion and equal treatment of all religions in the U.S. military provides our service members with a deeper understanding of the different lived experiences of their fellow Americans and communities abroad, ultimately enhancing our armed forces' ability to identify and address national security challenges. This Nation was founded on the principles of freedom and equality, not for some, but for all. As a society and a government, we must continue to move toward the ideal of inclusion.

As the House and the Senate work to reconcile their respective versions of the NDAA this year into a single conference report that can go to the President for his signature, please be assured that I will keep your view in mind.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.

For more information on this or other issues, I encourage you to visit my website, https://casey.senate.gov. I hope you will find this online office a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office, or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

Sincerely,

Bob Casey 

United States Senator

The sentence in Sen. Casey’s letter that we find concerning is: “Some individual [sic] and organizations take exception to the views and tactics of the MRFF.” We’re not sure how to take that. Is Sen. Casey listening to these unnamed individuals and organizations who “take exception to” MRFF? We certainly hope not, but the Christian nationalist voices are very loud, which is why we need to make our voices just as loud.

CLICK HERE NOW TO GO TO THE FORM

AND SEND THE LETTER.

Or, if you’d prefer to write your own letter, go to the bill’s page on Congress.gov, and click on “Contact Your Member” to the right side of the page under “Give Feedback on This Bill.”

Two long-time MRFF Advisory Board members — Col. Larry Wilkerson (ret.), who served thirty years in the Army and finished his career as Chief of Staff to General/Chairman of the Joint Chiefs/Secretary of State Colin Powell, and Col. James Currie (ret.), who served thirty years, active and reserve, in the Army, was for eighteen years Professor of National Security Studies at the Defense Department’s National Defense University, and was also a staffer for Senator Lloyd Bentsen (D-TX) — have sent a letter to Sen. Casey regarding his response to his constituents and dispelling whatever negative impression of MRFF the senator might have gotten from any individuals and organizations that “take exception to the views and tactics of the MRFF.” Click here to read their letter.

Letter from MRFF Advisory Board members

Larry Wilkerson and James Currie to Sen. Bob Casey regarding his response to his constituents who

have sent him MRFF's petition letter

(See Sen. Casey's response to his constituents in Daily Kos op-ed above.)

Military Religious Freedom Foundation

Albuquerque, NM  87123

August 18, 2023

The Hon. Bob Casey

United States Senate

Washington, DC  20510

Dear Senator Casey:

The two of us who signed this letter are members of the Advisory Board of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF). Both of us are retired from the United States Army with the rank of Colonel. Larry Wilkerson served thirty years in the Army and finished his career as Chief of Staff to General/Chairman of the Joint Chiefs/Secretary of State Colin Powell. James Currie served thirty years, active and reserve, in the Army and was for eighteen years Professor of National Security Studies at the Defense Department’s National Defense University. He was also a staffer for Senator Lloyd Bentsen (D-TX).

We are writing to you in specific response to your recent letter to one of your constituents, who contacted you about the language in the “Turner Amendment,” which the House of Representatives made into Section 1045 of its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Your constituent forwarded your letter to us. Because the Senate has no such provision in its version of the NDAA, this section will be an item of discussion when the House and Senate Armed Services Committees meet in conference to work out the differences between the two bills. The Turner Amendment strikes a devastating blow at religious freedom in the US military by forbidding anyone in the Defense Department—this would of course, include anyone in the military services—from responding to a request from the MRFF for relief for any military servicemember who had contacted MRFF and asked for its assistance in protecting their religious freedom and beliefs, a principle in which we know you strongly believe.

Let us start by describing the MRFF, as you may not know its origin and its work. The MRFF was founded almost twenty years ago as a non-profit organization dedicated to defending and protecting at no cost to the recipients of its assistance the rights of military servicemembers as they are guaranteed in the First Amendment to the US Constitution. In accordance with this Amendment, military servicemembers are free to practice their religious beliefs without coercion or proselytizing from those above them in the military chain of command. Unfortunately, some individuals—a minority, but nevertheless a significant number—in that chain of command have concluded that their rank and position give them the right to dictate to those under them what they should believe and how they should express their religious beliefs. As a result, more than 84,000 individual servicemembers have reached out to the MRFF over the years and asked for its help in protecting and defending their First Amendment rights. As you suggest in your letter to Ms. (name withheld), these actions by MRFF have led some individuals and organizations to “take exception to the views and tactics of the MRFF.” Indeed, they do, and we wear such “exception” as a badge of honor, regarding it as strong testimony and proof of the effectiveness of the actions of the MRFF. 

Some such individuals are undoubtedly identifiable as “Christian Nationalists,” a misnomer if there ever were one, because these people are in no way either Christian or Nationalist. They are, instead, small-minded religious bigots who would violate the Constitution by imposing their own version of religion on men and women who have taken an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic” and who proudly wear their military uniform while doing so.  For the record, ninety-five percent of servicemembers who have come to the MRFF for assistance self-identify as Christian. The other five percent identify themselves as Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, other religions, or of no religion. Under our First Amendment, as you so well understand, they are all entitled to do so.

You state so eloquently in your reply to your constituent that, “The inclusion and equal treatment of all religions in the U.S. military provides our service members with a deeper understanding of the different lived experiences of their fellow Americans and communities abroad, ultimately enhancing our armed forces' ability to identify and address national security challenges. This Nation was founded on the principles of freedom and equality, not for some, but for all. As a society and a government, we must continue to move toward the ideal of inclusion.” The MRFF totally embraces and endorses these sentiments, and we emphasize to you that adoption of the Turner Amendment would essentially prevent the MRFF from defending those rights that are being encroached upon by certain people in the military hierarchy. We ask, Senator Casey, that you do more than keep your constituent’s “views in mind” when the Senate considers the NDAA. We ask that you make a particular point of standing up for the First Amendment rights of those who serve our country in uniform by taking a public stance against the Turner Amendment and its attack on the religious freedom of those in the US military. We thank you for considering our position and request.

Sincerely,

Larry Wilkerson

Colonel, US Army (Ret.)

Board of Advisors

Military Religious Freedom Foundation

James T. Currie

Colonel, US Army (Ret.)

Board of Advisors

Military Religious Freedom Foundation

Email from a Christian conservative attorney who disagrees with MRFF "on just about every point of law," but considers Turner's amendment to be "unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination" and has contacted his rep and senators to oppose it

From: (Christian conservative attorney’s name withheld)

Subject: NDAA

Date: August 21, 2023 at 11:45:50 AM MDT

To: Mikey Weinstein <mikeyw4444@gmail.com>

Hope this finds you well, Mikey. Just wanted you to know I contacted both my (democratic) senators and my Republican representative on this, with this being the gist of my comment:

"Soon the Senate and House will be reconciling the House and Senate versions of the 2024 NDAA. I am concerned that the House version was amended to prohibit any expenditure of federal funds to respond to advocacy work by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. As an attorney who has litigated First Amendment cases for 25 years, I know that provision is patently unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. Fortunately, the amendment was omitted in the Senate version and it should stay omitted. I disagree with the MRFF on just about every point of law--its president, Mikey Weinstein, takes a hyper-separationist view of religion that our Founders wouldn't recognize and the First Amendment does not support. But I cannot stand by when such blatantly unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination is afoot in federal budgeting. As I read the House amendment, it would even preclude MRFF from using the Freedom of Information Act to obtain public documents. For the sake of free speech, please ensure that anti-MRFF amendment does not sneak back in through reconciliation. The answer to bad speech is more speech, not censorship. Please preserve that principle in the NDAA."

If you haven't already, please take a minute to submit our petition letter opposing Turner's amendment to your representative and senators.

This form submits a letter to Congress on your behalf, which

will be sent to your U.S. Representative in the House and your

U.S. Senators urging removal of Christian Nationalist Rep. Turner's

blatantly unconstitutional NDAA amendment and, additionally,

sends a copy to the entire Senate Armed Services Committee.

Previous MRFF coverage of

Christian nationalist Rep. Turner's amendment

A handful of MRFF's numerous run-ins with

Christian nationalist GOP Congress members

and Senators over the years