Candy Being Used To Get Kids to Religious Classes Sparks Fight With Schools

Religious liberty advocates are threatening legal action against public schools in Ohio who have implemented policies restricting students from returning to campus with candy or other items they get from off-site religious studies.

The central issue in the debate is whether such rules infringe on free speech rights or if they help maintain fairness and safety in public school.

Why It Matters

The controversy reflects a growing tension over how public schools accommodate religious programs under state and federal law.

Advocates for religious liberty argue that bans on candy and trinkets unfairly target religious speech. Critics of the giveaways counter that these incentives create inequity and potential health risks while also testing the limits of religious expression in public education.

What To Know

"Release time" programs, legalized under a 2024 Ohio law, allow students to leave the public school campus for religious learning. To qualify as religious release time, educational instruction must take place off campus, with parental permission and with no public funding.

In response to the law, some school districts are adopting policies that limit what students can bring back and have banned items like candy, stickers or small toys.

Other school boards have adopted guidance from the North East Ohio Learning Associates (NEOLA), which includes optional restrictions on students bringing back "materials, snacks, clothing, candies, trinkets, or other items."

LifeWise Academy, a Christian group that runs Bible-based educational sessions during the school day with parental permission, is one of the largest users of religious release time in Ohio and nationwide. The group strongly opposes policies limiting what items from release time students can take back to their public school campus.

The First Liberty Institute, representing LifeWise, has argued that the NEOLA guidance is unconstitutional.

In an April 16 letter obtained by the Columbus Dispatch, First Liberty attorney Jeremy Dys wrote that the NEOLA recommendations "[add] liability to any Ohio school district who adopts the proposed policy." Dys described the restrictions as "fiery hoops" that infringe on students' First Amendment rights.

LifeWise founder Joel Penton echoed the concern.

"Religious release time programs such as LifeWise should be accessible to all families on a consistent basis under Ohio law," Penton told the outlet.

People who support the NEOLA guidance and other policies restricting what students can bring back from off-site religious studies argue that the items are used to foster exclusion.

Allergies and liability are also part of the concern.

"Who is dealing with that emergency if LifeWise sends a kid back to school with a nut-based candy in their pocket and the kid gives it to someone else?" Jaclyn Fraley, a parent, told Statehouse News.

What People Are Saying

Fraley said in an interview with Statehouse News: "I'm not allowed to send candy to school with our child. Our school district has a policy of 'you may send in no food or treats that are food-based for a birthday celebration.'"

Dys said in an interview with Columbus Dispatch: "It almost reads as if NEOLA is trying to work with others that don't want to see release time education occurring. So they're creating a lot of bureaucratic traps along the way that would make it really, really, really hard."

What Happens Next

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost has warned districts that overly broad policies may violate constitutional protections. In an April 10 advisory, Yost said that "taken literally, a policy with broad language like that would prohibit sharing literature like memory cards, devotional lesson books, or even Bibles."

Meanwhile, some Ohio districts, like Worthington, have adopted the item-restriction policy, while others, like Westerville, have not.

Do you have a story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have any questions about this story? Contact LiveNews@newsweek.com.