Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 4 - Revision history

Admin at 19:03, October 24, 2025

2025-10-24T19:03:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:03, October 24, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=
Line 21:		Line 21:
	\|seo_title=Article I, Section 4 of the Texas Constitution ("Religious Tests")		\|seo_title=Article I, Section 4 of the Texas Constitution ("Religious Tests")
	\|seo_keywords=Article 1 Section 4, Texas Bill of Rights, religious tests		\|seo_keywords=Article 1 Section 4, Texas Bill of Rights, religious tests
	\|seo_description=No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office~~, or public trust,~~ in this State.		\|seo_description=No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office in this State.
	\|seo_image_alt=Texas Bill of Rights		\|seo_image_alt=Texas Bill of Rights

Admin: Undo revision 8966 by Admin (talk)

2025-10-24T19:00:21Z

Undo revision 8966 by Admin (talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:00, October 24, 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{DISPLAYTITLE:Article I, Section 4 of the Texas Constitution (''<small>"Religious Tests"</small>'')}}{{Texas Constitution\|text=Adopted February 15, 1876:		{{DISPLAYTITLE:Article I, Section 4 of the Texas Constitution (''<small>"Religious Tests"</small>'')}}{{Texas Constitution\|text=Adopted February 15, 1876:

	No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.		'''No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.'''

	\|editor=		\|editor=

Admin at 18:59, October 24, 2025

2025-10-24T18:59:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:59, October 24, 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{DISPLAYTITLE:Article I, Section 4 of the Texas Constitution (''<small>"Religious Tests"</small>'')}}{{Texas Constitution\|text=Adopted February 15, 1876:		{{DISPLAYTITLE:Article I, Section 4 of the Texas Constitution (''<small>"Religious Tests"</small>'')}}{{Texas Constitution\|text=Adopted February 15, 1876:

	~~'''~~No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.~~'''~~		No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

	\|editor=		\|editor=

Admin: Undo revision 8871 by Admin (talk)

2025-06-21T16:11:18Z

Undo revision 8871 by Admin (talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:11, June 21, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if Obergefell ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=

Admin at 16:10, June 21, 2025

2025-06-21T16:10:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:10, June 21, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if Obergefell ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=

Admin at 16:07, June 21, 2025

2025-06-21T16:07:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:07, June 21, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the ~~robes—then~~ yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=

Admin at 16:05, June 21, 2025

2025-06-21T16:05:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:05, June 21, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the ~~robe–then~~ yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robes—then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=

Admin at 16:00, June 21, 2025

2025-06-21T16:00:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:00, June 21, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is ~~correct–that~~ is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe–then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'~~–not~~ on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct—that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe–then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'—not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=

Admin at 01:12, June 12, 2025

2025-06-12T01:12:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:12, June 11, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct–that is, if Obergefell ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe–then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'–not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct–that is, if ''Obergefell'' ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe–then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'–not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=

Admin at 01:10, June 12, 2025

2025-06-12T01:10:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:10, June 11, 2025
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|recent=		\|recent=

	* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#~~p190 ???~~] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct–that is, if Obergefell ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe–then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'–not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")		* ''Hensley v. State Comm'n on Jud. Conduct'', 692 S.W.3d 184, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4865454919474533790#p208 208] (Tex. 2024) (J. Blacklock, concurring) ("If the Judicial Conduct Commission is correct–that is, if Obergefell ushered in an era in which judges who publicly espouse traditional Christian beliefs are unfit for the robe–then yet another deeply rooted constitutional principle . . . . Judge Hensley has been the target of a punitive administrative apparatus with the power, ultimately, to exclude her from holding office. This has happened 'on account of [her] religious sentiments'–not on account of rude or insulting or unprofessional words or actions towards anybody of any sexual orientation.")

	\|historic=		\|historic=