Crucifix Clash Erupts—Teacher Pulled, School in Chaos

A Connecticut teacher’s decade-long display of a small crucifix has ignited a national legal battle over religious liberty in public schools, raising urgent questions about the limits of faith expression under government employment.

Story Snapshot

Veteran teacher Marisol Arroyo-Castro was suspended and reassigned after refusing to remove a crucifix from her classroom desk.
Legal action alleges her constitutional and civil rights were violated, citing recent Supreme Court precedent.
The case is being closely watched for its impact on religious freedom and public school policy nationwide.
District officials deny some allegations and say no decision to terminate has been made, while proceedings continue.

Teacher’s Crucifix Sparks Legal Showdown in Connecticut School

Marisol Arroyo-Castro, a Catholic educator with more than 30 years’ experience at DiLoreto Elementary & Middle School in New Britain, Connecticut, found herself at the center of a constitutional storm after refusing to remove a small crucifix from her desk. The incident began in December 2024 when a vice principal asked Arroyo-Castro to take down the cross following a complaint. Despite the order, Arroyo-Castro left the crucifix in place, prompting a meeting with school administrators and a union representative.

The district cited its policy against religious displays in public school settings as grounds for enforcement, but Arroyo-Castro and her legal team say the move amounts to unlawful religious discrimination and selective enforcement of policy, especially since she had displayed the crucifix for over a decade without incident. They also point to reports of other teachers displaying personal and religious items without facing similar consequences.

The dispute escalated quickly. Arroyo-Castro was handed a two-day unpaid suspension for insubordination in late December 2024. By January 2025, she was placed on administrative leave, removed from classroom duties, and reassigned to a non-teaching position. The district’s stance remained firm: she would not be allowed to return unless she removed the crucifix. In March, attorneys from First Liberty Institute and WilmerHale, acting on her behalf, filed a Title VII complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and moved for a preliminary injunction in federal court. Legal filings argue that the district’s actions violate not only her rights under the First Amendment and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, but also run counter to the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, which affirmed certain forms of religious expression by public employees.

District and Legal Responses Highlight Deep Divides

District officials, including Superintendent Tony Casper, have pushed back on some of the most publicized allegations. Casper denies that Arroyo-Castro was threatened with termination and calls some of her legal team’s claims “inaccurate and misleading.” Nevertheless, the school district has not allowed Arroyo-Castro to return to her classroom unless she complies with the order to remove her crucifix. The union, present during disciplinary meetings, has so far not swayed the outcome, and the district insists its actions are necessary to maintain religious neutrality and avoid the appearance of institutional endorsement of religion. Meanwhile, Arroyo-Castro’s supporters argue that the policy is enforced unevenly and that her treatment amounts to targeted retaliation for her faith.

First Liberty Institute, a prominent religious liberty advocacy organization, says the case is a clear-cut matter of constitutional rights. They argue that the school’s actions violate both Title VII—protecting employees from religious discrimination—and the precedent set by the Supreme Court, which recognized the right of public employees to engage in religious expression, provided it does not disrupt the workplace or constitute official endorsement. The case is now being watched nationally as a test for the boundaries of religious freedom in public schools and could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.

Broader Implications for Religious Liberty and Policy Nationwide

The ongoing legal battle has implications far beyond New Britain. If courts rule in favor of Arroyo-Castro, public employees could gain greater latitude to express religious beliefs at work, especially in light of recent Supreme Court rulings. Religious liberty advocates believe this case could reinforce constitutional protections for teachers and other government workers, ensuring that personal displays of faith are not penalized under broad and inconsistently enforced policies.

On the other hand, some legal scholars and advocates for strict church-state separation warn that allowing religious symbols in public school classrooms could be perceived as government endorsement of religion, potentially undermining the Establishment Clause. Districts across the nation are watching closely, as an adverse ruling could force them to revisit—and possibly revise—longstanding policies on religious expression by staff. The debate has also rekindled broader concerns among conservatives about government overreach and the perceived assault on traditional values, particularly under the previous administration’s policies that many saw as hostile to religious liberty and parental rights.

Ongoing Uncertainty and Community Tensions

As of August 2025, Arroyo-Castro remains in a reassigned, non-teaching position. Legal proceedings continue, with a federal judge yet to issue a ruling on the injunction request. The district’s legal fees are mounting, and the broader school community remains divided. Supporters of Arroyo-Castro argue that her steadfastness defends a fundamental American right, while critics caution against blurring the line between personal belief and public institution. The outcome of this case could influence not just local policy, but national standards for religious expression and free speech in the public sector for years to come.

At stake is more than one teacher’s employment—it is the enduring question of how Americans can live out their faith in the public square, and whether constitutional freedoms will be robustly defended in an age of increasing government scrutiny and cultural division.