In his concurring opinion in #Espinoza, Justice Thomas says the prohibition on govt aid for religion bars govt from "even permitting any signs of religion in the governmental realm" & requires govt to be "virtually silent on matters of religion...." That's simply wrong.

Public schools can teach about religion. Students can pray voluntarily there. Secondary students can form religious clubs that meet on public school property just as other extra-curricular clubs do. Religious individuals frequently gather on govt property & meet w/govt officials.

Presidents can discuss their personal faith. Diplomats can discuss religious facets of landscape. Govt reqularly marks religious & secular holidays . Govt works w/faith-based & community organizations to serve people in need, even sometimes dedicating offices to these efforts.

Govt employees can wear religious garb or jewelry, keep sacred scripture at their desk, & engage in religious expression w/coworkers to same extent that they may engage in comparable nonreligious personal expression. For more:
https://www.melissarogersbook.com/about 

https://www.melissarogersbook.com/resources 

It's true that Supreme Court has generally (and wisely) read 1A to prohibit government-supported religion, & that's clearly what's bothering Thomas. But that's no excuse for falsely suggesting that Court rulings have had the effect of removing religion from governmental sphere.