California just passed a law that requires all employers to institute anti-hate speech training. And what’s particularly controversial is that it doesn’t make exceptions for churches. Assembly Bill 1803 (AB-1803) was passed earlier this year by the California General Assembly and signed into law late last month by Governor Gavin Newsom.
The bill modifies the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, which requires anyone “regularly employing five or more persons” to conduct bi-annual trainings on sexual harassment. AB-1803 adds to this requirement mandatory anti-hate speech training:
Beginning January 1, 2028, an employer shall also include anti-hate speech training as a component of the training and education specified in paragraph (1). Anti-hate speech training shall provide supervisors and employees with practical guidance on recognizing, reporting, and confronting workplace speech that vilifies, humiliates, or incites hatred against people based on the protected characteristics listed in subdivision (a) of Section 12940.
Notably, however, the bill does not define what hate speech entails. It cites divisive speech, but it’s unclear what exactly this means. And given that the existing California Fair Employment and Housing Act already considers “misgendering” an act of harassment, many are raising questions about whether these further requirements violate First Amendment freedoms, especially for churches and religious organizations.
This concern is especially relevant since California law considers “gender identity and expression” a “protected characteristic”—the very same language cited in the bill. This could mean that a church that believes God defines gender and sexuality would be required to host training sessions that undermine these biblical teachings.
Critics rightly point out that this is a violation of the First Amendment—and of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects sincerely held religious beliefs.
To require a church or a religious non-profit to conduct employee trainings that condemn their beliefs as “hate speech” is an affront to religious liberty. Yet this is what California seems intent to do.
Even as the California Family Council (CFC) sent a letter on behalf of 2,000 churches urging a No vote on AB-1803, the General Assembly still passed it by a margin of nearly 4:1. CFC cited concerns about conscience protections for religious organizations, arguing that “AB 1803 offers zero conscience exemption, forcing them to endorse or deliver training that contradicts their beliefs.”
The organization went on to argue that the bill “places religious organizations in direct conflict with state mandates, threatening their ability to operate according to their convictions.”
The fact that this bill is now law is concerning, and reflects a larger cultural shift away from protecting the freedom of religion that America was built upon.
Even for those outside of California, it’s a reminder of the dangers that state-defined standards of “fairness” can impose on freedoms of speech.
Kentucky is not immune from chilling effects on freedoms of conscience. Earlier this year, Louisville photographer Chelsey Nelson won a years-long legal fight against the city of Louisville for its Fairness Ordinance which would have required her to violate her sincerely held religious beliefs by photographing a same-sex wedding.
Nelson sums up the matter aptly: “The freedom to speak without fear of censorship is a God-given constitutionally guaranteed right.” And when government forgets this, it’s up to the courts to remind them.
0 Comments