UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — The introduction of memes, artificial intelligence (AI) and the first American pope have transformed conversations around the relationship between church and state during the 2026 midterm elections, according to Gary Adler, associate professor of sociology at Penn State.
Adler studies the ways culture works at the intersection of civil society, religion and government in American communities. In the following Q&A, he explained the history, social impact and constitutional context of religion in American society and politics.
Q: What does the U.S Constitution — specifically the Bill of Rights — say about religion in America?
Adler: The Bill of Rights has a “free exercise” clause, which is usually understood to protect the freedom of individuals and groups to believe and practice religion in their own ways. It also has a “non-establishment” clause, which is usually understood to prevent government from favoring a particular religious group.
At an abstract level, the very existence of these clauses makes clear that religion is a part of the American story. But the vague nature of the clauses signals that managing the role of religion in our system of government is never a project that is completed once and for all. The application of these clauses has been debated across U.S. history. We are now in an era in which the Supreme Court seems to prioritize free exercise over non-establishment.
I don’t think the justices have dealt with the challenges that the country’s growing religious diversity and non-religiousness introduce. For example, some of the recent decisions appear to privilege Christian symbols and activities while disregarding other religions' concerns. At times, comments from Justices have suggested that religion is under attack. This is a misreading of religious change. This sentiment is likely to upset the balance between government and religious freedom that Americans generally seek.
My research team has discovered that local government officials are overwhelmingly supportive of religious liberty. In fact, they think religious liberty is more respected in their local community than in the country as a whole. But they are worried that policies newly approved by the justices — like sectarian prayers before government meetings or religious exemptions for government workers — will undermine government and introduce social conflict. That is why my team continues to research local government officials — they are the experienced leaders for a new era of religion and government in the United States.
Q: What role did religion play in recent election cycles?
Adler: Religion plays different roles in U.S. election cycles because, as my colleagues and I recently argued, religion has different pathways for intersecting with public life. We have been running a decade-long project to understand the connections of religion, politics and government.
One pathway we’ve identified is what we call politicized religion — how religion directly affects political processes, like mobilizing voters or spreading partisan stances. Over the past two decades of election cycles, politicized religion has increased. Religious congregations do more voter drives and lobbying. Clergy give more political cues at worship services. And there is now a strong link between some religious identities — as well as non-religious identities — and political affiliation. And yet, we found that the overwhelmingly majority of congregations, clergy and government officials do not want this trend to continue. They would rather separate religion from partisan politics.
Another pathway we call public religious culture focuses on the religious stories and symbols that are part of civic life. In this pathway there are opposing trends, as Americans have different visions of how to connect civic identity with religion. Christian nationalism has become prominent, as vocalized by some elected officials and leaders on the Pentecostal religious right. But Christian nationalist views are not actually widely supported among the general public.