Oct 6, 2026
Liberty Counsel filed a response brief in federal court on behalf of bi-vocational Pastor Luke Ash opposing a motion from the City of Baton Rouge to dismiss his religious discrimination case. Ash was unlawfully fired from the East Baton Rouge Parish Library in July 2025 for refusing to lie and use false male pronouns to refer to a female coworker. Pastor Ash contends that the library’s “Inclusivity Policy” requiring such usage violated his First Amendment religious rights and that the library failed to engage in the Title VII religious accommodation process before firing him.
The lawsuit states this is viewpoint discrimination for “disqualifying” a person’s religious beliefs from protection and employment. Ash is asking the court to deny the dismissal motion so his case can move forward to the discovery phase and trial.
Ash is also seeking a permanent injunction that declares the library’s “Inclusivity Policy” as unconstitutional for violating his rights of free speech, religious exercise, equal protection, the Louisiana Preservation of Religious Freedom Act, as well as his religious protections under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The lawsuit also requests that the court order the library to reinstate Pastor Ash to his prior position, restore his benefits, and award backpay, damages, and attorney’s fees and costs.

Pastor Luke Ash
In July 2025, a coworker asked Pastor Ash whether he would use male pronouns for a biological female trainee. As a Christian minister, Pastor Ash holds religious beliefs that biological sex is immutable and that being complicit in a known lie would compromise those convictions, and so he told the coworker that he could not do so. Shortly thereafter, his supervisors reiterated that the “Inclusivity Policy” states “all employees have the right to be addressed by their chosen name and pronouns.” When questioned, Pastor Ash told his supervisors that he was not going to lie and needed an accommodation.
Later that month, his supervisors informed him that he was being terminated because his religious beliefs were incompatible with employment at the library.
In addition to the city and the East Baton Rouge Parish Library, the lawsuit also names the Metropolitan Council and the Library Board of Control for the City of East Baton Rouge.
Now, the defendants argue Ash has sued too many parties that do not need to be in the lawsuit. The motion seeks to remove East Baton Rouge Mayor-President Sid Edwards, Library Director Katrine Stokes, the Metropolitan Council and its Mayor-Pro Tempore Brandon Noel, and the Library Board of Control and its President Candace Temple. The defendants seek to narrow the case’s defendants to the City of Baton Rouge and Parish of East Baton Rouge arguing it is redundant to name individual officials in their official capacities since they are already legally encompassed within the city government and a lawsuit against them is effectively the same as a lawsuit against the city itself. The defendants also dispute whether they can be sued since they are not independent entities.
However, Liberty Counsel argues in its response that redundancy is not a valid basis for dismissal at the pleading stage and that all named defendants may be necessary to provide Ash’s requested relief. Ash states that the “Inclusivity Policy” was the moving force behind the violations of his constitutional rights and that each individual defendant in their official capacity played a policymaking or enforcement role related to that policy.
Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “The City of East Baton Rouge Parish Library and all officials involved in the enforcement of the “Inclusivity Policy’ violated the U.S. Constitution and Louisiana law for requiring Pastor Ash to refer to a female employee by masculine pronouns and then firing him for upholding his religious beliefs. The library also violated Title VII for not even considering a religious accommodation for Pastor Ash. There is no compelling interest in requiring Pastor Ash to lie or affirm false sex-based pronouns. Employers cannot force people to choose between their faith and their livelihood.”
