Why Sunday, Why Now?
Organizations, Agencies, and Movements Promoting Sunday Blue Laws and Sacredness
Introduction: Why Sunday, Why Now?
The re-emergence of Sunday rest language in Project 2025 has generated intense concern among religious liberty advocates, legal scholars, and minority faith communities. While Sunday laws—commonly known as blue laws—have existed in American history for centuries, the explicit framing of Sunday as a societally necessary, government-supported day of rest in a modern federal policy blueprint is unusual and historically significant.
Project 2025, authored and coordinated by the Heritage Foundation and supported by a broad coalition of conservative organizations, envisions a restructuring of the federal government that includes normative moral assumptions about family life, work, sexuality, and religion. Within this framework, Sunday is elevated as a shared cultural anchor—a day intended to restore families, communities, and the nation itself.
We will examine:
- What Project 2025 actually proposes regarding Sunday
- Which organizations promote Sunday blue laws today
- Which governmental agencies would implement or support these policies
- How this fits into historical blue law enforcement
- Why religious liberty advocates see this as a constitutional and theological problem
- Project 2025 and the “Uniform Day of Rest”
The Heritage Foundation and Project 2025
Project 2025 is a 900+ page transition blueprint developed by the Heritage Foundation, with contributions from more than 100 conservative organizations. Its goal is to prepare an incoming administration to rapidly reshape federal agencies, regulations, and enforcement priorities .
While Project 2025 itself is broad, its companion policy document, “Saving America by Saving the Family,” explicitly calls for:
- Restoration of blue laws
- Establishment of a uniform day of rest
- Legal and regulatory encouragement of Sunday closure or reduced commerce
The document frames Sunday rest as:
- Necessary for family cohesion
- Essential for worker dignity
- A corrective to moral and demographic decline
Although the proposal sometimes includes a narrow exemption for those who observe a different Sabbath (e.g., Friday–Saturday), Sunday remains the normative default .
- Core Organizations Promoting Sunday Blue Laws Today
- The Heritage Foundation (Primary Driver)
The Heritage Foundation is the central intellectual and organizational force behind the modern revival of Sunday law discourse.
Key roles:
- Authoring policy proposals calling for Sunday rest
- Training future executive-branch appointees
- Framing Sunday laws as “family-friendly” rather than religious
Heritage explicitly argues that:
- Markets should be constrained for moral ends
- Government should shape cultural rhythms
- Sunday rest is “civilizationally necessary”
This represents a departure from classical small-government conservatism toward moral governance .
- Christian Nationalist Advocacy Networks
While not always formally labeled as such, Christian nationalist organizations form a significant ideological backbone for Sunday sacredness advocacy.
These include:
- Policy coalitions aligned with dominion theology
- Think tanks emphasizing America’s “Christian founding”
- Legal advocacy groups redefining church-state separation
Americans United and the Baptist Joint Committee (BJC) have documented how Project 2025 envisions no meaningful institutional separation between church and state, allowing religious norms to shape public law .
Sunday rest is framed not merely as convenience, but as moral obedience embedded in law.
- Family Policy Councils and Social Conservative Coalitions
At the state and local level, family policy councils play a critical role. These organizations often operate under different names but share common goals:
- Restrict Sunday commerce
- Promote Sunday as “family day”
- Oppose Sabbath pluralism as “social fragmentation”
These groups lobby:
- State legislatures
- County commissions
- Labor boards
Their language often mirrors Project 2025 almost verbatim, emphasizing social cohesion over individual conscience.
- Certain Labor-Rest Advocacy Groups (Strategic Allies)
Interestingly, some worker-rights advocates support Sunday rest—not for religious reasons, but for predictable time off.
Project 2025 strategically incorporates this language to:
- Broaden appeal
- Reframe Sunday laws as pro-worker
However, critics note that labor protections can exist without religiously fixed days, making Sunday selection inherently theological .
- Governmental Agencies Implicated in Sunday Law Promotion
Project 2025 does not require Congress to pass a national Sunday law outright. Instead, it relies on executive-branch interpretation and enforcement across multiple agencies.
- U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)
The Department of Labor would be central in:
- Defining overtime exemptions
- Regulating mandatory rest periods
- Encouraging employer compliance with “communal rest norms”
By privileging Sunday as the standard rest day, DOL policy could indirectly coerce religious minorities.
- Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
HHS is tasked under Project 2025 with:
- Promoting “family stability”
- Encouraging traditional social rhythms
- Aligning public health with moral values
Sunday rest is framed as:
- Beneficial to mental health
- Necessary for child development
This merges public health authority with religiously derived norms .
- State and Local Governments (Primary Enforcement Arm)
Historically and practically, blue laws are enforced locally.
State and municipal governments would:
- Restrict Sunday business hours
- Limit alcohol sales
- Regulate recreational activities
Recent debates over Sunday liquor laws demonstrate how deeply religious assumptions remain embedded in local governance .
- Judicial System (Interpretive Power)
Courts historically upheld Sunday laws by labeling them “secular” rather than religious.
Project 2025 relies heavily on:
- Conservative judicial appointments
- Reinterpretation of the Establishment Clause
- Expansion of “Free Exercise” claims for the majority faith
This legal strategy mirrors older Supreme Court decisions that upheld Sunday laws while marginalizing Sabbath-keeping minorities .
- Historical Context: Blue Laws and Religious Coercion
Colonial Origins
Blue laws originated in Puritan New England, where Sunday observance was enforced by fines, imprisonment, and public punishment.
Activities banned included:
- Travel
- Commerce
- Recreation
- Non-Christian worship
These laws were explicitly theological, not secular.
19th-Century National Sunday Law Movement
The late 1800s saw organized efforts to enact national Sunday legislation, supported by major Protestant denominations.
Opposition came from:
- Jews
- Seventh-day Adventists
- Catholics
- Secular labor groups
This era shaped modern religious liberty jurisprudence and minority resistance .
20th-Century Rebranding as “Secular Rest”
Courts upheld Sunday laws by arguing they:
- Promoted rest, not worship
- Reflected social custom
- Were religiously “neutral”
Yet neutrality vanished in practice when:
- Saturday Sabbath keepers lost jobs
- Minority businesses were fined
- Conscience exemptions were denied
- Why Religious Liberty Advocates Are Alarmed
- The Illusion of Neutrality
Sunday laws are never neutral in a religiously plural society.
Selecting Sunday:
- Privileges Christianity
- Marginalizes Jews, Muslims, and Seventh-day Sabbath keepers
- Forces economic penalties on minorities
This concern is repeatedly raised by Adventist and interfaith organizations .
- Erosion of Church–State Separation
Project 2025 explicitly rejects the “wall of separation” metaphor.
Sunday rest becomes:
- A moral mandate
- A cultural liturgy
- A legally enforced sacred rhythm
This transforms the state into a moral enforcer, not a neutral arbiter.
- Prophetic and Theological Implications (Adventist Perspective)
From a Seventh-day Adventist standpoint, Sunday laws represent:
- State enforcement of religious observance
- Union of church and state
- Coercion of conscience
This explains the strong public warnings issued by Adventist entities regarding Project 2025 .
Conclusion: A Cultural Turning Point
Project 2025’s emphasis on Sunday as a uniform, government-supported day of rest is not an isolated policy idea. It reflects a broader movement involving:
- The Heritage Foundation
- Christian nationalist networks
- Family policy councils
- Strategic use of federal agencies
- Historical patterns of religious coercion
While framed in the language of family health and worker dignity, Sunday blue laws remain inherently religious. In a pluralistic society, such policies raise profound constitutional, theological, and ethical concerns.
The debate is not about rest—but about who gets to define sacred time, and whether the state has the authority to enforce it.
