He claimed so in a sensational press release. He did win a case, but things were a little bit more complicated.
by Massimo Introvigne


One of the most unusually titled official press releases ever was issued on February 2 by the Office of the Attorney General for the State of Idaho, Raúl R. Labrador. The title reads, “Attorney General Labrador Defeats Satan.” Admittedly, this would be no mean achievement. Bud did he really “defeat Satan”?
After the 2022 Supreme Court decision “Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization” the State of Idaho introduced anti-abortion legislation. The Temple of Satan sued the State claiming inter alia that the new Idaho law violated freedom of religion of its female members. As reported in the decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho dated January 31, which granted the State’s motion to dismiss, The Satanic Temple (TST) claimed that “Members of TST wishing to have an abortion perform the Satanic Abortion Ritual. This self-described ‘destruction ritual’ mandates, among other things, that the pregnant woman look at her own reflection and recite a personal affirmation as follows: ‘By my body, my blood; By my will, it is done.’ Members of TST assert Idaho’s new laws prevent them from engaging in this personal abortion ritual by dictating that women cannot legally end a pregnancy if they so desire.”
In reading the decision, it comes out that this claim by the TST was not examined on its merits. The State prevailed because the TST could not prove that it has female members in the state who were personally affected by the Idaho law. The religious liberty claim was rejected also because TST failed to respond on time to the State’s argument that it lacked merit. Then “at oral argument, Defendants [the State and its representatives] opined that the best course of action would be to dismiss Claim Four [the freedom of religion claim] in light of TST’s acquiesces and then this case would have finality. Then, if TST so desired, it could file another lawsuit alleging a fresh free exercise claim. The Court agrees this is the best approach.”
Attorney General Labrador did not “defeat Satan” on the substance of the matter but on technical grounds. This does not mean that chances for TST to prevail in “another lawsuit” in Idaho would be bright. Unless it persuades pregnant Idaho women to join it, TST would still have the problem that it has no female members personally affected by the new state law. For the time being, TST has announced its intention to appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal rather than filing a fresh lawsuit.
Parallel cases have been filed by TST against Indiana and Texas. In Indiana, the case was stopped by the same objection that TST has no members in the state, while in Texas it claims it has one female devotee who performed the abortion ritual. The Texas case is proceeding and may lead to a decision on the merits of the case.
I am not persuaded that abortion accompanied by the recitation of a religious formula becomes a religious ritual protected by freedom of religion or belief. If it was so, one could also create “rituals” for not paying taxes while reciting an appropriate religious formula affirming that this is an expression of a faith-based claim to freedom. On the other hand, I find Labrador’s claim that he “defeated Satan” unduly sensationalist.


Like many others, including not a few Christians and U.S. politicians, Idaho’s Attorney General also misunderstood what TST is all about. As detailed in the section on TST of my textbook “Satanism: A Social History” (Brill: Leiden, 2016) and in Joseph Laycock’s excellent study of TST “Speak of the Devil” (New York: Oxford University Press, 2020), TST does not really “worship Satan” in the religious sense of these words. It is more a coalition of libertarians who use Satanism as a language and a picklock to unhinge legislation they see as subservient to Christianity and violating the principle of separation of church and state.
Years ago, when visiting their headquarters in Salem, Massachusetts, with Joseph Laycock I told them (with tongue in cheek) that I expected to find there a “Satanic cult” but I found “something much worse, a ‘cult’ of lawyers.” This was not to dismiss the relevance of the TST. “‘Cults’ of lawyers,” paradoxically using religion as a tool to affirm secularism, may indeed become a force to be reckoned with.