Maine Supreme Court Weighs Custody Case Banning Church Attendance

UPDATE: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court is currently deliberating a controversial custody case that could redefine parental rights and religious freedom. In a significant ruling, a lower court has barred Emily Bickford from taking her 12-year-old daughter to church or exposing her to Bible teachings, citing potential psychological harm. This unprecedented decision has sparked widespread debate and could set a national precedent.

The case, Bickford v. Bradeen, centers around a custody order issued on December 13, 2024, that granted exclusive control over religious decisions to the child’s father, Matthew Bradeen. Bickford’s attorney, Mathew Staver, argues that the court’s restrictions not only violate her constitutional rights but also impose an unconstitutional “total veto” over her ability to participate in her daughter’s religious education.

During oral arguments on November 13, 2025, Staver emphasized the lack of evidence showing abuse or neglect. He stated, “There is no finding of abuse or neglect,” and described the child’s anxiety as insufficient to justify the sweeping order. The court had previously determined that teachings at Calvary Chapel—particularly imagery of “fallen angels” and themes of “eternal suffering”—had caused psychological distress for the child.

The justices are evaluating critical questions about the extent of judicial authority in family law, particularly regarding religious practices. One justice queried whether the “best interest of the child” standard might conflict with religious-freedom principles. Staver contended that constitutional protections demand a higher threshold for restricting parental religious expression.

In defense of the lower court’s decision, Bradeen’s attorney, Michelle King, argued that the ruling was justified based on substantial evidence of emotional distress. She claimed the trial judge appropriately identified “compelling state interests in avoiding substantial harm” to the child. King referenced expert testimony suggesting that the religious teachings had observable emotional consequences.

As the court deliberates, the implications of its eventual ruling are profound. It may clarify how courts balance parental rights with claims of psychological harm in custody disputes and how they consider the content of religious teachings. The outcome could also influence similar cases across the nation.

Bickford’s attorney stated, “I’ve never seen in the history of my career an order as hostile as this one,” underscoring the emotional weight of the case. Meanwhile, King raised concerns about Bickford’s credibility, alleging dishonesty regarding her intentions during co-parenting discussions.

With oral arguments concluded, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court will soon issue a written decision that could reshape the landscape of parental rights and religious freedoms in custody cases. The justices’ ruling will be closely watched, not just in Maine but across the United States, as it tackles fundamental questions about the intersection of family law and religious expression.

Stay tuned for updates as this critical case unfolds.