The Charlie Kirk Show

Episode: The Real Scoop on "Separation of Church and State"
Date: November 28, 2025
Host: Andrew Kolvet (for the late Charlie Kirk)
Guest: Kelly Shackelford (President and CEO, First Liberty Institute)

Episode Overview

This episode features Andrew Kolvet hosting a comprehensive conversation with Kelly Shackelford on the true legal and cultural meaning of “separation of church and state.” The episode examines recent Supreme Court decisions that have transformed religious liberty in America, dispels myths about the constitutional basis of the “separation,” and explores its implications for Christians and other faiths—including the increasing role of Islam in American public life. Shackelford offers deep legal insight, shares stories from the new presidential Religious Liberty Commission, and underscores the importance of principled judicial appointments, all with a focus on empowering listeners to understand and exercise their religious freedoms.

Key Discussion Points, Insights, and Memorable Moments

1. Religious Liberty at an All-Time High

• [04:17] Kelly Shackelford: “Everybody alive right now has more religious freedom than they've ever had in their life.”
  • Supreme Court recently decided four major religious liberty cases in 13 months, three of them landmark, shifting decades of precedent.
  • Notable victories:
    • Carson v. Makin (Maine): Now parents may use vouchers at religious schools; school choice programs can’t discriminate against religious options.
    • Religious Freedom in the Workplace: Supreme Court overturned a 47-year-old precedent, strengthening protections for accommodating religious practice (e.g., Sabbath observance).
    • Coach Kennedy Case: Affirmed that teachers and coaches don’t lose First Amendment rights at school; significant reversal of previous “Lemon” precedent.

2. The “Separation of Church and State” Myth

• [07:33] Andrew Kolvet: Outlines Thomas Jefferson’s 1802 Danbury letter—the phrase “a wall of separation” not found in the Constitution or Declaration.
• [08:56] Kelly Shackelford: “It's not in the Constitution, right? … The founders did not want us to establish a national church.”
  • Unpacks the Lemon v. Kurtzman standard, which for five decades drove a wedge between government and public religious expression—now overturned.
  • [12:17] Shackelford: The new precedent is that “if there's a religious activity and it’s … consistent with our history and our traditions as a country, it’s presumptively constitutional.”

3. Implications for Non-Christian Religions—Rising Muslim Population

• [15:15] How religious liberty applies to other faiths, including Muslims, amid demographic changes.
• [15:38] Shackelford: “Religious freedom to do what? … To pray? Sure. … To put Sharia law in? No.”
• Discussion about “call to prayer” in Dearborn, Michigan:
  • [19:10] Dearborn Police Chief: “It's no different than church bells that you might hear on Sunday.”
  • [20:36] Kolvet: Raises concern: “We don’t want to hear Muslim calls to prayer in our neighborhoods. … This is a Christian nation. It still is.”
  • [23:50] Shackelford: Difference between religious freedom and immigrant assimilation—“the whole purpose of the United States is assimilation. It's the melting pot, not creating a new government from some other source.”
  • Noise and disruption are regulated neutrally; the standard is practice-based, not faith-based.

4. School Religious Liberty and Parental Rights

• [33:16] Introduction to the President’s new Religious Liberty Commission (reports directly to the President).

  • [33:25] Story: Teacher in Connecticut (Marisol Castro) fired for having a small cross at her desk—while other personal items like Yankee banners or pride flags were allowed.
    • [35:29] Kolvet: “She got suspended. They walked her out of the school with all of her stuff in a box like a criminal.”

• [39:40] Viral commission hearing:

  • [43:08] Student Shea, age 12: (Testimony about refusing to teach gender ideology against his faith)

    “When I was in fifth grade, my school forced me to teach my kindergarten buddy about changing his gender using a book called My Shadow is Pink. … The school treated us badly and kids started bullying me and my brother because of our faith. … I hope no other family has to go through what mine did. Thank you.”

  • The school was forced by federal court ruling to notify parents and provide a religious exemption.

• [45:02] Shackelford: Proposes all federally funded school districts certify they follow Department of Education religious liberty guidelines—training required or lose funding.

5. Judicial History and Impact on Religious Liberty

• [48:55] [50:08] Kolvet and Shackelford review the 20th-century judiciary:
  • Supreme Court became aggressively secular during the ’60s and ’70s—landmark decisions like Roe v. Wade, expansion of establishment clause.
• [51:49] Shackelford: Parties’ approaches to judicial appointments:
  • Democrats: Consistently select ideologically aligned justices.
  • Republicans: Often rely on personal recommendations rather than deep vetting.
  • Post-Harriet Miers, focus shifted to candidate record/proof points (“show me the proof”).
  • [56:04] First Liberty now maintains the largest vetting division for judicial nominations, using advanced AI and data gathering.

6. Action Steps for Listeners

• [58:25] Listeners encouraged to visit firstliberty.org—sign up for insider updates to stay abreast of religious liberty cases, policy, and action items.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• [04:17] Kelly Shackelford:
  “Everybody alive right now has more religious freedom than they've ever had in their life.”
• [08:56] Shackelford:
  “It's not in the Constitution… The founders did not want us to establish a national church.”
• [12:27] Shackelford:
  “If there's a religious activity and it’s … consistent with our history and our traditions as a country, it’s presumptively constitutional.”
• [15:38] Shackelford:
  “Religious freedom to do what? … To pray? Sure. … To put Sharia law in? No.”
• [23:50] Shackelford:
  “…the whole purpose of the United States is assimilation. It's the melting pot, not creating a new government from some other source.”
• [29:53] Kolvet:
  “I wonder if you could make the argument that the Muslim call to prayer five times a day is infringing on my freedom not to have to hear it. … Although they would say the same thing about church bells, which is objectively a beautiful thing to hear.”
• [33:25] Kolvet:
  “[A teacher] got suspended. They walked her out of the school with all her stuff in a box like a criminal.”
• [43:08] Student Shea:
  “I hope no other family has to go through what mine did. Thank you.”
• [51:49] Shackelford:
  “…the Democrats were committed to picking people that would get to the results they wanted… whereas Republicans put a Republican on and they’d be good one time and bad the next.”

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [04:17] – More religious liberty in America today than ever before
• [05:23] – Carson v. Makin: Religious school choice case explained
• [07:33] – Dissecting “separation of church and state”; Lemon case history
• [12:27] – Supreme Court’s new “history and tradition” test for religious expression
• [15:15] – Rights for Muslims and other faith groups under religious liberty rubric
• [18:52] – Discussion and audio: Muslim call to prayer vs. church bells in Dearborn, MI
• [23:50] – Assimilation, immigration, and American culture
• [33:25] – Teacher fired for displaying a cross at her desk
• [43:08] – Student Shea’s testimony at religious liberty commission hearing
• [48:55] – Judicial history: Influence of liberal vs. conservative courts post-WWII
• [56:04] – First Liberty’s judicial vetting operation

Tone and Language

The conversation is unapologetically conservative, passionate about Christian cultural underpinnings, and driven by a narrative of both loss (the assassination of Charlie Kirk) and determined optimism (“revival,” “taking the country back”). Shackelford is measured and legally precise, while Kolvet voices audience anxieties, cultural frustration, and determination to defend religious and American values.

Conclusion

This episode empowers listeners with the real legal landscape after key Supreme Court cases, debunks “separation of church and state” as constitutional dogma, confronts the challenges brought by religious pluralism and immigration, and advocates for informed, active defense of religious liberties. The episode encourages personal action, vigilance in legal and educational arenas, and informed participation in the cultural and judicial battles that will shape America’s future.