Loren AliKhan's nomination to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia should be opposed to safeguard the religious freedom of all Americans. Her history of presenting extreme legal arguments and losing in court raises serious concerns about her suitability for the bench, her impartiality, and her judicial acumen.

Both in private practice and as Solicitor General of D.C., AliKhan has targeted religious individuals and groups, including Sikhs. She has challenged the right to congregate for worship, the right of religious institutions to select their own teachers, and the right of faith-based organizations to determine their own structure without government intervention. Her assaults on the First Amendment are well outside the mainstream legal thought and have been repeatedly rejected by the courts.

In Hosanna Tabor v. EEOC (2012), AliKhan's extreme legal position, if accepted, would have effectively gutted the First Amendment's protection of religious freedom. Her brief targeted the ministerial exception, a crucial aspect of religious freedom that protects religious employers' right to hire and fire ministers without government interference. A unanimous Supreme Court, including Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor, rejected AliKhan's arguments, calling them "untenable" and incompatible with the First Amendment.

AliKhan's extreme views on religious freedom were also rejected by the D.C. District Court, the very court to which she is now nominated. In Capitol Hill Baptist Church v. Bowser (2020), she unsuccessfully attempted to defend D.C.'s decision to restrict religious gatherings while allowing large political protests during the COVID-19 pandemic. This resulted in D.C. taxpayers having to reimburse the church $220,000 in legal fees. During her nomination hearing, Senator Hawley questioned AliKhan about her reliance on a political scientist's affidavit in this case, which the court found inadequate. AliKhan's defense was that the case was "fast-moving."

The D.C. Court of Appeals also rejected AliKhan's stance against the religious liberty rights of Sikhs seeking to build a temple in the nation's capital. In Jaswant Sawhney Irrevocable Trust, Inc. v. District of Columbia, she opposed a property tax exemption for a Sikh temple, arguing for a narrow interpretation of religious liberty that the court found to be "without a basis in text or precedent."

Given her repeated losses in court and her extreme views on religious freedom, the Senate should reject Loren AliKhan's nomination to the U.S. District Court. Her record demonstrates a clear disregard for the First Amendment and raises significant doubts about her ability to serve as an impartial judge.