Deion Sanders is caught up in a religious freedom conflict — again

Deion Sanders is sparking religious freedom conflict again this season by incorporating faith-based messages into his football program.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation contacted the University of Colorado in late September to say that Sanders cannot have his spiritual adviser pray with the team.
“Using a coaching position to promote Christianity amounts to unconstitutional religious coercion,” the foundation argued.
But this week, another legal organization stepped in to defend Sanders’ actions and argue that the Freedom From Religion Foundation is misapplying the law.
Courts have long allowed for sports chaplains, as well as team prayers, according to an Oct. 14 letter from First Liberty Institute to the University of Colorado.
The same two groups — First Liberty Institute and the Freedom From Religion Foundation — squared off soon after the University of Colorado hired Sanders to lead the football program at the end of the 2022 college football season.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation argued that Sanders was unlawfully pressuring players to pray during team meetings, which prompted the University of Colorado to give Coach Prime additional training on the rules around religious expression.
But that additional training led First Liberty Institute to raise free speech concerns and urge Colorado to clarify its approach to religious freedom on campus, as the Deseret News reported at the time.
The conflict ultimately blew over without a lawsuit being filed, but now very similar questions about Sanders’ conduct are being raised.
The religious freedom conflict tied to Colorado’s football program is unsurprising if you’ve followed school prayer conflict over the years.
Confusion is widespread over the rules for praying in public spaces, as religious freedom experts argue over when private religious expression becomes government-sponsored religious expression and when optional prayers become coercive.
In June 2022, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a praying football coach, saying that his postgame prayers were a protected form of private expression, not coercive speech.
The case centered on him taking a knee to pray on the field, not praying in the locker room with the team.