President Donald Trump established the Religious Freedom Commission nearly a year ago through Executive Order 14291. The committee established an advisory body to advise the White House on matters of faith and religious freedom in the United States. But as tensions in the Middle East continue to shape political rhetoric at home, the wife of a former NFL quarterback received a final letter of termination from the president himself in the wake of an escalating controversy.
The chain of events that led to her removal began on February 9, during a committee hearing focused on anti-Semitism in the United States. That meeting quickly became contentious, with Boehler engaging in direct exchanges with witnesses and other attendees about how to define anti-Semitism and criticism of Israel within that framework. Commission leaders later pointed to those exchanges as the basis for disciplinary action.
“President Trump has officially removed me from the Religious Freedom Commission for exercising my religious freedom,” Kelly Prejean Boller, wife of former Baltimore Ravens quarterback Kyle Boller, wrote on X on March 12. “The only Catholic woman to oppose Zionism was expelled as a prelude to war with Iran.”
For Boehler, the removal brought deeper conflict.
The entire purpose of the Religious Freedom Commission is to uphold First Amendment rights, the Constitution’s guarantee that every American can freely practice his or her faith without government interference or fear. In her mind, her dismissal not only ended her role on the committee; It undermines the principles for which the Commission was established.
The hearing itself became tense before any action was taken. Several witnesses, including Jewish students, spoke of the anti-Semitism they experienced on college campuses, particularly in the months following protests related to the Israel-Hamas war. What followed was more than a routine exchange of views, quickly turning into a back-and-forth debate about where criticism of Israel ends and anti-Semitism begins, with no clear consensus in the room.
Witnesses at the hearing shared their personal experiences with anti-Semitic incidents at colleges across the country. Boller, a former Miss California USA, challenged the testimony and questioned whether opposition to Zionism constituted anti-Semitism.
“Catholics do not support Zionism, as you know. So are all Catholics anti-Semitic?” she said during the hearing, her remarks drawing widespread attention.
She also defended conservative commentator Candace Owens, pushing back against claims that Owens made anti-Semitic comments. “I didn’t hear anything anti-Semitic from her mouth,” Boehler said, a stance that was met with immediate pushback from other attendees.
Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon, who testified at the hearing, responded directly: “You should read more of her statement,” citing examples of what he said crossed into the realm of anti-Semitism. He added that while criticism of Israel is not inherently anti-Semitic, “some people try to hide their anti-Semitism under the guise of criticizing Israel.”
Boehler’s remarks went further, at one point citing biblical references related to long-standing theological interpretations of Jesus’ death, an area widely considered sensitive by modern religious scholarship (including official Catholic doctrine) and historically misused in anti-Semitic narratives. The exchange heightened scrutiny of her remarks outside the hearing room.
Those incidents and other moments prompted the commission’s chairman, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, to publicly announce her removal from office two days later.
“No member of the committee has the right to hijack a hearing for his or her own personal and political agenda on any issue,” Patrick said in a statement on February 11. “Make no mistake, that’s what happened at our hearing on Anti-Semitism in America on Monday. That was my decision.”
Despite Patrick’s statement, Boehler remains on the committee’s official membership list and has challenged his authority to remove her. She argued that the state’s lieutenant governor does not have the authority to remove presidential appointees. “As its name suggests, this is President Trump’s Religious Freedom Commission, not yours,” she wrote. She called the move a “serious overreach” and suggested it reflected a “Zionist political agenda.” The dispute left the matter unresolved for nearly a month. Now, the White House has stepped in and issued a formal cease-and-desist letter.
“Dear Mrs. Boller, On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position as a member of the Commission on Religious Freedom is terminated immediately. Thank you for your service. Mary Sprowls, Office of Presidential Personnel, White House,” Boller wrote in the letter posted on her X account.
Boehler’s removal did not last long, however, as another member of the committee also resigned. A lawsuit challenging the commission’s existence is already in court.
Another council member resigns in protest of Carrie Prejean Boller
Carrie Boehler’s firing set off a ripple effect within the committee. The day after she was removed from office, another presidential appointee announced his resignation in protest.
“My name is Samira Munshi. I am a presidentially appointed advisor to the White House Commission on Religious Freedom. Today, I am resigning due to the injustice and brutality committed by this administration at home and abroad,” Samira Munshi wrote on X on March 13.
In a lengthy note accompanying his resignation, Munshi outlined multiple reasons for his resignation. In addition to Boehler’s removal, Munshi wrote that other council members “ridiculed” her and were “hostile to her community.”
She also said internal dynamics had changed after she previously spoke about the Palestinian issue, saying she began to feel marginalized and excluded from key communications, including the list of witnesses ahead of the hearing. “If we are not free to observe our religious beliefs in the United States … then in what country are we free to do so?” she wrote, blaming her resignation on broader concerns about religious freedom within the committee.
The committee now also faces scrutiny from the outside. In February, a coalition of religious groups filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in New York. It directly challenges the legal basis on which the commission was established.
The lawsuit, filed by groups including the Interfaith Alliance and Muslim, Hindu and Sikh organizations, argued the commission failed to meet federal requirements for ideological balance. It claimed the body was made up “almost entirely” of conservative Christian members and did not adequately represent diverse religious views, raising questions about its legitimacy even before the controversy over February’s hearings unfolded.
But all in all, for an agency tasked with protecting religious freedom, the controversy will only deepen discussions about who gets to define religious freedom and at what cost.
