Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which states still have religious test language in their constitutions as of 2025 and what efforts removed them (by amendment or court ruling)?
Executive Summary
As of the provided analyses, the landscape is mixed: historical research documents many state constitutions once contained explicit religious-test language, contemporary reviews report that several states still retain such text on the books, but court rulings and federal law have largely rendered those provisions unenforceable. The sources disagree about the exact list of states still carrying test clauses in 2025 and point to two removal pathways—constitutional amendment and judicial invalidation—so the definitive current roster requires a state-by-state check of text plus litigation history [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Old Texts, New Questions — How widespread were religious tests originally?
Historical surveys show that religious tests were common in early state constitutions: Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Vermont, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire all included some form of oath or religious qualification during the Revolutionary-era period documented in the source dated June 1, 2025. That research places these provisions in context of late-18th-century statecraft and the debate over Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibited federal religious tests. The historical record establishes that religious-test language is a deep legacy in state law, but it does not by itself tell us which states retained such language into the 21st century or which removed it by amendment or court decision [1] [5].
2. Conflicting contemporary snapshots — Different sources offer different rosters
More recent analyses diverge on which states still "have" religious-test language on the books in 2025. One contemporary review asserts that some states—Maryland, Pennsylvania, Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee—retain words that could be read as requiring belief in God or accepting religious tests, while noting that federal constitutional constraints and court rulings have generally limited enforceability (dated December 16, 2024). Another source focused on Arkansas’s constitution describes a provision addressing religious tests in early 2025 but does not clearly state that the language was removed, leaving ambiguity about whether text remains or has been effectively neutralized [4] [2]. This divergence shows disagreement between secondary compilations about which constitutions still carry test clauses textually in 2025.
3. Removal by amendment — Where legislatures and voters acted
The available material identifies constitutional amendment as one clear route to remove offending language. The Oregon example is explicit: Oregon’s constitution contains a prohibition on religious qualifications for office in Article I, Section 4, indicating that the state’s constitutional text was reworked to preclude tests for office (publication dated October 1, 2025 in the analysis). That illustrates a direct legislative or popular amendment remedy: states can and have deleted or rewritten test clauses through formal amendment processes. The historical pieces and state-specific notes indicate that numerous other states pursued amendments at various times, though the provided set does not catalog every amendment or its date [3].
4. Removal by courts — Federal law and judicial invalidation at work
Another major mechanism is judicial invalidation: courts applying Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and subsequent federal precedent have declared state religious-test provisions unenforceable, even when the language remains in state constitutions. The contemporary review explicitly observes that federal rulings have had the effect of rendering many state test clauses legally impotent, though the text may remain on the books [4]. This produces a two-tier reality: textual relics persist, but practical effect has often been nullified by federal constitutional supremacy and case law. The sources underscore that determining whether a clause is merely dormant or effectively dead requires checking relevant court decisions in each state.
5. What the sources agree on — the practical and legal picture
Across sources there is consensus on two core points: first, religious-test language was historically widespread; second, federal constitutional law and litigation have significantly limited the enforceability of any remaining state test clauses. Where they diverge is the precise inventory of states that still have test language in their constitutions as of 2025. The Arkansas note (Jan 1, 2025) illustrates retained language or ambiguity; the December 2024 compilation lists several states still carrying language; and the October 2025 Oregon entry shows proactive removal. Together these items paint a picture of uneven state practice: some states amended text, others left relics in place, and courts often supplied the final legal answer [1] [2] [3] [4].
6. What’s missing and what to check next for a definitive answer
The analyses make clear that a definitive 2025 roster would require a systematic state-by-state comparison of current constitutional text plus the latest appellate decisions. The existing materials give strong leads—historical prevalence, examples of retained language, and documented removals—but stop short of a comprehensive list. To resolve remaining uncertainties, consult each state constitution’s current text and search for recent state and federal court rulings addressing religious-test clauses; the sources here identify both the problem and the pathways for removal [1] [2] [3] [4].