A Connecticut public school teacher with more than 30 years in the classroom is appealing a federal court ruling over her right to display a crucifix at school. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for Dec. 7 at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Marisol Arroyo-Castro said she was shocked when an administrator told her the crucifix could not remain in her classroom and warned that refusing to remove it could be treated as insubordination. She recalled being told she could return to her room only if she left the symbol behind.
The dispute began in December 2024, when administrators at DiLoreto Elementary & Middle School in New Britain, Connecticut, directed Arroyo-Castro to take down a crucifix she had kept near her desk for about a decade. She taught middle-school social studies and described the item as a private source of comfort while she graded papers and completed reports.
Arroyo-Castro said she kept her faith largely to herself and that seeing the crucifix helped her feel calm. When school officials pressed her to remove it, she began crying, she recalled. The administrators eventually left her alone in the room.
On Dec. 11, 2024, the school issued her a formal reprimand for insubordination. The next day, officials removed the crucifix and suspended her without pay for two days. She was put on paid administrative leave on Dec. 16, then reassigned to a non-teaching position in March 2025.
Arroyo-Castro filed a federal lawsuit in January 2025, alleging that the district had violated her First Amendment rights. In November 2025, a federal judge denied her request for a preliminary injunction, concluding that she was unlikely to succeed because the crucifix’s display in a classroom amounted to government speech. Her lawyers appealed that decision, and the appeal over preliminary relief is now before the Second Circuit.
Arroyo-Castro said she was told she could not return to the school around students and was not to speak or interact with them or school staff. She said the restrictions left her feeling as though she had been treated like an outcast.
Becky Rees Dummermuth, senior counsel at First Liberty Institute, said the appeal will argue that the crucifix was an expression of Arroyo-Castro’s private religious beliefs. Her lawyers plan to rely in part on the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of football coach Joe Kennedy, which recognized protections for private religious expression by public employees.
Dummermuth said the attorneys will argue that Arroyo-Castro’s display was protected by the First Amendment’s Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses. They also contend that a school should not exclude religious items if staff members are otherwise allowed to keep personal belongings near their desks.
The Consolidated School District of New Britain said the case involves more than the presence of a religious symbol. In a statement, a district spokesperson pointed to an independent investigation that raised concerns about a broader pattern of comments and actions related to students from different religious backgrounds.
The district said it respects the religious beliefs and individual rights of students and staff, while also having a duty to maintain classrooms where students of all faiths and backgrounds feel welcome and respected. The spokesperson said the district had offered Arroyo-Castro several ways to practice her faith without infringing on students’ religious freedoms, but that she and her attorneys declined them. The district said it would continue to follow legal guidance.
The investigation, which included interviews with Arroyo-Castro, four teachers, the principal and the assistant principal, summarized students’ claims that she had referred to God, Jesus and religion in ways the investigator considered inappropriate. Arroyo-Castro denied making those references during class. The report also included criticism from teachers about her classroom management and interactions with students.
First Liberty Institute disputed the district’s account, saying officials had repeatedly told Arroyo-Castro she could return to her classroom if she removed the crucifix. The group said the district initially justified taking her out of the classroom as necessary to avoid an Establishment Clause violation, an argument it says is undermined by the Supreme Court’s Kennedy ruling.
