With almost all precincts reporting in Oklahoma’s State Senate District 8, Republican Bryan Logan handily won a special election tonight to represent the open seat in eastern Oklahoma through 2026. A pastor and general contractor from Paden, Logan carried each of the five eastern Oklahoma counties that span SD 8. He received 61.62 percent of […]

The post SD 8 election: Bryan Logan wins eastern Oklahoma seat appeared first on NonDoc.

If you ask lawmakers to describe Rep. Tom Cole and his more than 20 years of service in the House, Republicans and Democrats will both give him praise. Knowledgeable. A bipartisan negotiator. A friend.

But for the last year as Appropriations chair, the Oklahoma Republican has overseen one of the most bitter and partisan processes lawmakers have ever gone through while exercising Congress’ power of the purse. And Democrats are concerned this upcoming appropriations cycle will somehow be more bitter and partisan than the last.

Along with so many other norms, President Donald Trump has upended the practice of reaching across the aisle — particularly when it comes to appropriations bills. Lawmakers used to come together at the end of the year and approve a sweeping spending bill, after they were mostly unable to pass individual appropriations measures.

But during the last spending cycle, Republicans and Democrats weren’t able to agree on anything. Instead, Republicans rammed through a glorified continuing resolution that mostly extended the previous spending deal, with some notable exceptions that Democrats disagreed with.

Now, as Congress starts the appropriations process again, Cole is tasked with appeasing his GOP colleagues and somehow getting buy-in from Democrats to negotiate after they were largely shut out of talks last time.

“I’ve never seen it quite as challenging as it is now to come to deals,” Cole told NOTUS.

“We’re better off when we work together and find common ground,” he said. “I think the [appropriations committee] has a tradition of doing that. I don’t think that tradition is gone. We’ve just got to get back to our roots.”

Getting back to those roots won’t be easy. But somehow, even after the appropriations process devolved into a cascade of CRs, a spending deal that was reneged, and, finally, a partisan spending bill, Democrats told NOTUS they have hope.

The top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, suggested she blamed Speaker Mike Johnson, Trump and Elon Musk a lot more for the December spending deal falling apart than Cole. She said that legislation — which dissolved when Musk and some Republicans began railing against the special projects in the deal — was the product of intense negotiations between the two parties.

“Oh my gosh, heavy negotiations,” DeLauro said.

She said she’s worked “very closely” and “very, very well” with her counterpart. Ultimately, however, Trump’s grip on the conference made Cole’s work not matter all that much.

“It was hard, you know, when we were that close,” DeLauro said. “I continue to negotiate with him, but he is a good friend, and somebody who gets it.”

She said Cole doesn’t have the leeway she has to push back against the president.

Cole, for his part, said Trump is “not an insignificant player” in any negotiations on Capitol Hill — he has to sign the bill after all. But what the administration wants is not the end-all-be-all, as far as Cole is concerned.

Outside of his office last week, where the smell of cigar smoke filled the hallway, Cole held court with reporters. He talked about the tension between the president and Congress as Republicans now attempt to hammer out a reconciliation bill.

“Presidents and administrations don’t get to dictate what’s going to happen here,” Cole said. “Congress is not the Army, and the president is the president, but not the commander-in-chief of Congress.”

“We’re supporting this administration, what it’s trying to do, but with all due respect to anybody, I think the members have a better understanding of what can pass and what can’t than the executive branch does,” he added.

Cole told NOTUS he doesn’t think this administration has tried to dictate anything in particular, but he insisted spending bills must be “a negotiated product.”

“Leadership on both sides have to agree, and I don’t think leadership on either side was prepared to agree in December. I think that’s too bad because that was a time to make the deal,” Cole said. “Come March, clearly, we had a deal on the table, we thought, and we couldn’t quite get there. And again, I think that was pressure from leadership.”

It’s true that spending negotiations were largely taken from Cole. Republican leaders, under pressure from Trump and conservatives, seemed to think mostly extending current spending levels was the way to go. And once, somewhat miraculously, Republicans were able to advance their bill out of the House, a number of Democrats in the Senate swallowed the legislation, reasoning that it was better than a shutdown.

It wasn’t how Democrats wanted the process to play out. But Democrats also suggested they didn’t think it was how Cole wanted it to play out either.

Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern told NOTUS he respects and admires Cole, whom he worked with closely when they served as the top members of the Rules Committee for their respective parties. McGovern said Cole, “if left to his own devices,” could come up with a “decent” appropriations package. But, McGovern said, Cole isn’t steering that spending ship.

The Trump administration and the Freedom Caucus have put Cole in a “tough spot,” McGovern said.

“My fear is that he is not going to be allowed to work his will,” he added. “What we’ve seen to this point is that reasonable people like Tom Cole seem to have been kind of pushed to the sidelines.”

Yes, Democrats were unhappy with the last appropriations process. Yes, Cole oversaw the process. But Democrats don’t seem to blame him for the outcome.

While that sort of goodwill among Democrats could be a liability in the red-meat Republican conference, GOP lawmakers also suggested it was an advantage. Rep. Steve Womack, who chairs a key subcommittee on Appropriations, said Cole’s favorability in both parties is exactly what’s needed.

“He’s a very well-respected member, kind of more of an institution guy, which is what I think we need right now, in terms of being — I mean, let’s just face it, we’re in divided government. The country’s divided,” Womack told NOTUS. “Political reality is you’re going to have to have things that can attract members on both sides of the aisle for the most important work that our Congress needs to be doing, and I think Tom Cole is the ideal person to lead the effort in that regard.”

Other Republicans on the Appropriations Committee agreed.

Rep. David Valadao emphasized the “tough” political environment members are in right now. He said Cole was better positioned than anyone to be chair at the moment.

“We’re trying to reach an agreement on top-line numbers that we could actually get something to the president’s desk and be signed by the president. And [Democrats] weren’t willing to negotiate,” Valadao said. “Hopefully, moving forward, they’re willing to talk to Tom, get to top-line numbers, agree to them and start appropriations bills, but it really is going to fall on both sides to come to an agreement that can get across the desk.”

Another longtime appropriator, Rep. Mike Simpson, echoed Valadao, saying Republicans couldn’t find a better chair than Cole, “especially in these times,” with razor-thin majorities in the House and Senate.

“Leadership decided to go a different direction to do the year-long CR,” Simpson said. “It is not something that anybody on the Appropriations Committee wanted, but we had to do something, and Tom’s very good at doing that.”

“There’s not a bigger supporter of leadership in getting the job done than Tom is,” Simpson said.

The post Tom Cole’s Bipartisan Reputation Gets Put to the Test in Trump’s Partisan Washington appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

Testifying for the second time in front of a House investigative committee examining the agency she leads, Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services Commissioner Allie Friesen went on the attack this morning, accusing former department officials of “abuse, negligence and likely corruption” that has led to the payroll problems revealed to legislators […]

The post In fiery testimony, Friesen says ODMHSAS has ‘likely’ been plagued by ‘corruption’ appeared first on NonDoc.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin’s various plumbing businesses received $1.45 million in Paycheck Protection Program loans in April 2020 that have been forgiven. 

The Paycheck Protection Program was a pandemic relief program in which the Small Business Administration issued 11.5 million loans, totaling $792.6 billion, to incentivize small businesses to retain their workers on the payroll. 

Businesses in Oklahoma received 154,893 loans totalling $8.33 billion, and reported retaining 968,186 jobs. Mullin’s four businesses that received PPP loans reported 140 jobs retained..

One of Rep. Kevin Hern’s companies, KTAK, received $1.07 in PPP loans, which went to the five McDonald’s it owned – those loans have also been forgiven. 

Though the PPP did not initially bar members of Congress, H.R.8265, introduced in September 2020, made entities in which such people held a controlling interest of 20% or more ineligible. 

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Oklahoma Watch partners with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims.

Sources

• ProPublica Tracking PPP – MULLIN SERVICES INC
• ProPublica Tracking PPP – MULLIN ENVIRONMENTAL INC
• ProPublica Tracking PPP – MULLIN PLUMBING INC
• ProPublica Tracking PPP – MULLIN PLUMBING WEST DIVISION INC
• ProPublica Tracking PPP – KTAK CORPORATION I
• Pandemic Oversight Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)
• Clerk of the House of Representatives Financial Disclosure Report

The post Did an Oklahoma member of Congress have over a million dollars in business loans forgiven while serving as a representative?  appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

NORMAN, Okla. — Sometimes, Jakob Topper teaches his Christian faith to his six-year-old daughter using children’s Bible stories illustrated with teddy bears. Other days, he might use her kid-friendly Bible featuring Precious Moments figures as characters. One thing he knows for sure: The King James version is not on the reading list, given some of its adult themes of sexual assault and incest. 

As a parent and a Baptist pastor, Topper opposes Oklahoma’s state superintendent of public instruction’s mandate to put a King James Version Bible in every grade 5–12 classroom. The father of three is also not keen on the state’s newly proposed social studies standards that would require biblical lessons starting in first grade. 

“I want the Bible taught to my daughter, and I want to be the one who chooses how that’s done,” said Topper, who also has a one-year-old and a three-year-old and is pastor of NorthHaven Church in Norman, a university town. “If we’re talking about parental choice, that’s my choice. I don’t want it to be farmed out to anyone else.”

Norman, a central Oklahoman city of about 130,000, is an epicenter of resistance to the Bible mandate that the state superintendent of public instruction, Ryan Walters, announced last June. Opposition here has come from pastors, religion professors, students, parents, teachers, school board members and the school district superintendent, among others. The prevailing philosophy among Norman residents, who are predominantly Christian, is that they do not want the state — and namely, Walters — mandating how children should be taught scriptures. They want their children to learn from holy books at home or in church. 

Many residents see Walters’s pitch as a play for national attention, given his abundance of social media posts praising Donald Trump, who campaigned on returning prayer to schools and as president has established a White House Faith Office and a task force to root out “anti-Christian bias.” In September, Walters proposed spending $3 million to buy 55,000 copies of the Bible that has been endorsed by the president and for which he receives royalties. More recently, Walters — who in February clashed with his state’s governor for proposing that public schools track students’ immigration statuses — made media lists as a possible candidate for Trump’s education secretary. He was not picked. 

But beyond Walter’s national aspirations, the Bible mandate also seems like an attempt at one-upmanship, with other states angling to infuse Christianity into public schools. Louisiana, for instance, is in a court battle over its push for Ten Commandments posters in schools. Texas fought off Democratic opposition to approve an optional Bible-infused curriculum and financial incentives for school districts that use the materials. A slew of states have passed or promoted similar measures, including ones allowing chaplains to act as counselors in schools. Unsurprisingly, Walters, too, has advocated for displaying the Ten Commandments in every classroom and also has backed the conversion of a private virtual Catholic school into a charter school; the Supreme Court plans to hear oral arguments on the case on April 30.  

It goes without saying that Walters’s crusade is multifaceted. But fundamentally, all of his efforts amount to teaching the Bible “in inappropriate ways in public schools,” said Amanda Tyler, author of “How to End Christian Nationalism” and executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, a Washington, DC–based organization of attorneys, ministers, and others who advocate for religious freedom. “He’s saying you can’t be a good American citizen if you don’t understand the Bible,” she added. “It’s this merger of American and Christian identities, the idea that only Christians are true Americans.” 

On March 10, the Oklahoma Supreme Court dealt a blow to Walters’s plans: It issued a temporary stay prohibiting the state’s department of education from purchasing 55,000 Bibles with certain characteristics and from buying Bible-infused lessons and material for elementary schools. 

The stay stems from a lawsuit led by Americans United for Separation of Church and State on behalf of 32 plaintiffs, including parents, clergy, students and teachers. The group, which is suing Walters, claims the Bible mandate violated the state’s prohibition against using state funds for religious purposes and the state’s own statutes allowing local district control over curriculum.

As of now, until the court issues a final ruling, its decision marks a victory in Americans United’s attempt to stop Walters, said Alex Luchenitser, the organization’s associate legal director: “It protects the separation of church and state. It protects the religious freedom of students.” Speaking about the court’s stay, Walters, through spokeswoman Grace Kim, said in a statement: “The Bible has been a cornerstone of our nation’s history and education for generations. We will continue fighting to ensure students have access to this foundational text in the classroom.”

Meanwhile, Walters was also sued separately last summer by a parent in Locust Grove who contended the mandate violated the state and federal constitutions. The state education department has denied the claims of both suits and contended in legal briefs that using the Bible for its secular value does not violate the state’s constitution.

Walters’s mandate has also sparked concern because of the proposed social studies standards that followed. The standards, which were initially released in December and would require legislative approval, mention the Bible and its historical impact more than 40 times. Several of the standards attempt to erroneously frame the Bible, and specifically the Ten Commandments, as the foundation of American law. Biblical scholars from the University of Oklahoma and elsewhere believe these standards promote the long-standing trope of Christian nationalism, which is premised in part on the false idea that the nation’s founding documents stemmed from the Bible. (The founders were Bible readers, but not necessarily fans of the same versions or holy texts in general. In fact, Thomas Jefferson cut up pages of the Bible to remove mention of miracles or the supernatural.)

For example, Walters’s standards would require students in first grade to learn about David and Goliath, as well as Moses and the Ten Commandments, because the standards cite them as influences on the American colonists and others. Second graders would be asked to “identify stories from Christianity that influenced the American colonists, Founders, and culture, including the teachings of Jesus the Nazareth (e.g. the ‘Golden Rule,’ the Sermon on the Mount).” 

Related: Inside the Christian legal campaign to return prayer to public schools

“These new standards,” said a news release from the state department of education, “reflect what the people of Oklahoma — and all across America — have long been demanding of their public schools: a return to education curricula that upholds pro-family, pro-American values.” (Walters’s press office, despite repeated requests, did not make the state superintendent available for an interview.)

Critics in Oklahoma and elsewhere see Walters’s Bible mandate as part of a broader Christian nationalist movement. “I think Oklahoma is the test case for the nation,” said Dawn Brockman, a Norman school board member.

Walters, though, has been steadfast in his belief that the mandate is legal and critical for the education of Oklahomans. In the fall, after Americans United sued, Walters wrote on X: “The simple fact is that understanding how the Bible has impacted our nation, in its proper historical and literary context, was the norm in America until the 1960s and its removal has coincided with a precipitous decline in American schools.”

But nothing is simple about the history of the Bible in America’s schools. When public schools started to open in the 1800s, some required regular Bible readings. From the beginning, that practice was controversial: Schools typically favored the King James Version, pitting Protestants against Catholics, and riots over school Bible readings broke out from the 1840s into the 1870s, said Mark Chancey, a professor of religious studies at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. By 1930, 36 states allowed Bible reading to be a requirement or an option, but another dozen banned such activities.

A few decades later, a Pennsylvania family sued their school district for heeding the state’s 1949 law requiring the reading of 10 Bible verses and the recitation of prayers at the start of each school day. In 1963, just a year after a similar opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that requiring in-school Bible readings and prayers was unconstitutional. After those rulings, daily teaching from the Bible, for the most part, was halted, Chancey said, but backlash continued, with critics charging that removing prayer and Bible readings from schools had led to a decline in the morality of schoolchildren. 

Related: Teachers struggle to teach the Holocaust without running afoul of new ‘divisive concepts’ laws

In subsequent decades, the Supreme Court ruled against clergy-led prayer and prayer over the loudspeakers at football games in several school-related cases. But in a seeming reversal, in 2022, the high court ruled in favor of allowing a football coach to conduct midfield, postgame prayers, shifting the legal landscape. The majority’s opinion on the football coach’s prayer has prompted politicians and states to further test the limits of the separation of church and state. In February, lawmakers in Idaho and Texas even proposed measures to allow daily Bible readings in public schools again. 

In Norman, many teachers reacted to news of the Bible mandate with concern and fear. Spanish teacher Darcy Pippins, who is in her 27th year at Norman High, said she sometimes teaches about Catholicism because it is the religion of the Spanish-speaking world. But putting a Bible in every classroom and teaching from it is different. “I just don’t feel comfortable,” said Pippins, also a parent. “I’m not qualified to teach and to incorporate the Bible into what I teach.’’ 

Other teachers, said Brockman, the school board member, worried about professional repercussions were they not to follow the mandate, given that Walters had already targeted at least one Norman teacher in the past for objecting to bans on particular books. 

Nick Migliorino, the public school system’s superintendent since 2017, was the first superintendent in the state to publicly oppose the Bible mandate. When asked about it in a July interview with a local paper, he responded: “I’m just going to cut to the chase on that. Norman Public Schools is not going to have Bibles in our classrooms, and we are not going to require our teachers to teach from the Bible.”

Other superintendents followed, and by late July, at least 17 school district leaders said they had no plans to change curriculum in response to the Bible mandate, according to a report by StateImpact Oklahoma.

In an interview at his district’s headquarters, Migliorino emphasized that his school system already teaches how different religions affect history. Bibles, he noted, are accessible to students through the library. Migliorino added that the state superintendent had no authority to make school districts follow the mandate and that it would result in pushing Christianity on students. 

“It’s a captive audience, and that is not our role to push things onto kids,” he said. “Our role is to educate them and to create thinkers.”

Oklahoma already has a 2010 measure allowing school districts to offer elective Bible classes and to give students the latitude to pick the biblical text they prefer to use. But unlike Walters’s mandate, it allows for different biblical perspectives, said Alan Levenson, chair of Judaic history at the University of Oklahoma and a biblical scholar. Even still, there has never been widespread interest in a Bible elective in Norman, said Jane Purcell, the school system’s social studies coordinator. Nor was there much interest in such a class when she taught in Florida. Since 2006, at least a dozen states have passed laws promoting elective Bible classes.

This may be, in part, because educators worry about potential issues with teaching Bible courses, said Purcell: “It’s very easy for it to appear to be proselytizing.”

Related: How one district has diversified its advanced math classes — without the controversy

Walters, for his part, has not taken any of this pushback in stride. At a July 31 state board of education meeting, he lashed out against “rogue administrators” who opposed him, saying of the left: “They might be offended by it, but they cannot rewrite our history and lie to our kids.”

After the public schools superintendent publicly rejected Walters’s mandate, community members and teachers in Norman expressed relief. Meg Moulton, a realtor and mother of three, came to a July board meeting to thank the superintendent in person. “I’m a Christian mama,” she said. “I love teaching my kids about God. I love going to church.” 

But, she added, “Ryan Walters’s mandate makes it so that teachers and students who may not be Christians…[or] who may believe something different, are going to be essentially forced to learn something that they may not believe in.” 

Students and others I met with at a popular Norman coffee shop said they were concerned about how Walters’s mandate could affect religious minorities, women, and members of the LGBTQ+ community. “What Ryan Walters is trying to push goes in line with a lot of trends of kind of pushing back against LGBTQ,” said Isandro Moreno, a 17-year-old senior at Norman High. 

Phoebe Risch, a 17-year-old senior at Norman North, the town’s other public high school, said Walters’s mandate was part of what motivated her to restart her high school’s Young Democrats club and recruit roughly 30 members. Risch, already upset about her state’s readiness to ban abortion following the Supreme Court’s overturn of Roe v. Wade, fears that requiring Bible-based instruction could lead to the promotion of the idea that women are submissive. “As a young woman, the implications of implementing religion into our schools is a little scary,” she said, “especially because Oklahoma is already a very conservative state.”

Among the half dozen teens attending a confirmation class in December at Oklahoma City Reform temple B’nai Israel, most opposed the mandate, except for one. She said she supported it as long as the classroom teacher was careful and encouraged critical thinking. 

One teen recounted tearily how, during class the previous week, a friend had drawn a swastika on her paper as a taunt. “Stuff like that is so normalized,” she said. “It’s antisemitism. If that’s so normalized, normalizing Christianity further, it’s just worse.”

Imad Enchassi, an imam who oversees an Oklahoma City mosque and serves as chair of Islamic studies at Oklahoma City University, echoed similar fears for the Muslim community. “We’re already experiencing Islamophobia. Muslim kids who wear the headscarf already have been told they’re going to hell because they don’t believe in the Bible or they don’t believe in Jesus,” he said. “When curriculum mandates one religion over the other, that will further isolate our children.”

Some Oklahomans, though, do support the mandate. And at one of the state board of education meetings where Walters touted it, three residents expressed support for the idea — during public comment — as did at least one board member. That board member said he thought biblical literacy was important, while other supporters see the Bible mandate as a way to instill morality in the public schools. Ann Jayne, a 62-year-old resident of Edmond, about 15 miles north of Oklahoma City, makes a point of letting Walters know on his Facebook page that she’s praying for him, because she believes public schools need to instill Christian values. “I think we need church in the state,” she said. “I don’t see a problem with God being back in the school. Nobody is forcing them to become a Christian.”

Since last summer, Walters’s efforts to push Christianity have only become bolder. In mid-November, he announced the opening of the Office of Religious Liberty and Patriotism, which would, among other things, investigate alleged abuses against religious freedom and patriotic displays. Two days later, he announced that he was sending 500 Bibles to Advanced Placement government classes. He also emailed superintendents around the state with the order to show their students a one-minute-and-24-second video announcing the religious liberty office and praying for newly elected President Trump.

At a Christmas parade in Norman in early December, some residents called the video embarrassing, with many superintendents, including Norman’s, having declined to show it. However, while many residents seem to abhor the Bible mandate, they do not agree on how religion should be handled in public life. Despite some religious diversity and some liberal leanings common in a university town, Norman skews religiously conservative. That dichotomy means many residents see the Bible as so sacrosanct that they don’t want it taught in schools, yet they see no problem with other Christian-oriented school activities.

In some cases, residents like school board member Brockman, who is also a former teacher and lawyer with training on the First Amendment, have objected to school promotion of the religious aspects of Christmas. When she was a teacher at one of Norman’s two high schools, she asked to stop the playing of overtly religious Christmas songs in the halls during passing periods. She saw it as a “gentle reminder that the Supreme Court says we need to remain neutral on religion.” Her wish was granted. “They took it down with some consternation and played the Grinch in my honor.”

Related: Teaching global warming in a charged political climate

Residents have also quibbled over what to call the parade featuring Santa each December. Should it be called the Norman holiday or Christmas parade? It’s now known as the Norman Christmas Holiday Parade. In early December, the city’s mix of liberal and conservative influences shone through the glitz during the parade. The Knights of Columbus float had a sign that said “Merry CHRISTmas.” Norman’s Pride organization participated, with its human angels wearing wings lit up in rainbow colors.

Tracey Langford, watching the parade from the back of her SUV, was dressed in a red stocking cap and a red sweatshirt that read “Santa, define good,” a jab at the fact that she is a lawyer who cares about legal definitions. To her, the Bible mandate is a clear violation of separation of church and state.“Every home here has a Bible…. We don’t need to spend a dollar to get a Bible in every classroom,” said Langford, a lawyer at the University of Oklahoma and a parent of a first grader in Norman schools and a 15-year-old in a private school. 

Traci Jones, a parent of both a Norman sixth grader and fifth grader, likewise asked, “Who’s supposed to be teaching these kids the Bible? Is it just a random person? What if it’s an atheist or someone who has totally different beliefs than me?” As a nondenominational Christian, she added, “I think it’s wack to ask these poor teachers to teach that.”

What happens next may ultimately be decided in a courtroom. There is no sign yet when final opinions may be issued in either lawsuit.

State lawmakers at recent appropriation hearings said they were worried about the directive’s constitutionality, and in fact, in March, the Senate Appropriations’ Education Subcommittee  said it did not consider Walters’s $3 million request to purchase Bibles. The next day Walters announced he was launching a national campaign with a country singer to get Bibles donated to Oklahoma schools. (The legislature gets the final word on the Bible purchases, a line item in the education budget, and the standards, which the state board of education approved in late February.) Meanwhile, the fate of religion’s place in public schools on a national level likely will rest with the Supreme Court, with various lawsuits against state measures promoting Christianity making their way through the court system.  

In Norman, Jakob Topper, Kyle Tubbs and other Baptist pastors I met with at the headquarters of a statewide Baptist church organization were increasingly aghast at Walters’s mixing of religion and politics. Rick Anthony, pastor of Grace Fellowship, a Baptist church, centered his November 17 sermon on such concerns. “Almost comically, we’ve heard this week about a video made that was ordered to be shown to all children in the public schools and then sent to their parents,” he said. “Our question is…where are our voices as our political leaders cozy up to faith leaders, all the while destroying our faith institutions?” 

Kaily Tubbs, Tubbs’s wife and a fifth grade teacher in Norman schools, said the mandate conflicts with her personal belief on how faith should be handled in schools. She spoke also as a mother of a kindergartener and a third grader, both in Norman schools. “Our faith is really important to us,” she said. “I don’t want it to be used as a prop in a classroom.”

Topper said that at his church, the majority of his congregation believes in separation of church and state. He said he is aware of the religious diversity that exists in his town, too, and has both Muslim and Jewish neighbors. Like Anthony, he spoke with his congregation about Walters’s mandate, though in an informal weeknight meeting at his church, rather than as part of a formal sermon. “I wish,” he said, “that Jesus was left out of schools and left for the religious realm.”

Contact editor Caroline Preston at 212-870-8965, via Signal at CarolineP.83 or on email at preston@hechingerreport.org.

This story about Bibles in schools was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

The post How Oklahoma’s superintendent set off a holy war in classrooms appeared first on The Hechinger Report.