“Agreed. The idea that this was the outcome of a policy specifically implemented by Trump is never explained. What policy is he referring to, and how did that enable this specific display? There have been satanic groups for decades, well preceding Trump, and we’ve seen these sorts of displays from them, for years. Here’s just a small sample.”
Thank you for doing the research (reply #1030! That was my reaction, too.
The 2019 IRS ruling was that The Satanic Temple was entitled to 501(c)(3) status, so individuals could deduct donations on their federal income tax forms. But that didn’t determine First Amendment rights. We had the First Amendment for well over a century before there even was a federal income tax, let alone a section 501(c)(3).
DeSantis is correct that the IRS ruling came during the Trump Administration. He is incorrect to imply that, without that ruling, the government of Iowa would have been free to give the Christian religion (or one branch thereof) a legally preferred status. The government must be neutral among people whose religion is centered on God, Allah, Yahweh, Ahura Mazda, Satan, Zeus, or any other object of worship.
Thanks for filling in the blanks in regard to the IRS ruling. It’s as we both expected (i.e. the ruling had no effect one way or another on the ability of this group to make their public display).