Separationist secularism forces the separation of church and state. In this system, the state does not support any religious group and does not enforce religious laws. The challenges of separatist secularism include how the government should regulate the secular activities of religious groups and how to govern separately from religion when citizens, including government employees, are religious. The U.S. judiciary interpreted the U.S. Constitution to support this system in the 20th century, based on the ideas of John Locke and Thomas Jefferson.  But what is a secular argument? Some consider any thoughtful and critical, publicly understandable and rational argument to be a secular argument; Nevertheless, a central feature of political liberalism is that it sees all these arguments in the same way as religious arguments, and therefore these secular philosophical doctrines do not provide public reasons. Secular concepts and arguments of this kind belong to the first moral philosophy and doctrine and are beyond the political realm.  There are different traditions of secularism in the West, such as the French, Turkish, and Anglo-American models, and beyond, such as in India, where the emphasis is more on equality before the law and state neutrality than on general separation.
The objectives and arguments in favour of secularism vary widely, ranging from claims that it is a crucial element of modernization, or that religion and traditional values are backward and divisive, to claims that it is the only guarantor of the free exercise of religion. The legacy of John Peter Zenger`s trial, 17 Howell`s State Trials 675, illustrates the symbiotic relationship between history and law. In 1735, Zenger, editor of the New York Weekly Journal, was accused of slandering the governor of New York. During the trial, Zenger admitted to publishing the allegedly damaging article, but argued that the article was not defamatory because it did not contain inaccurate statements. In the American colonies, however, truth was not seen as a defense against libel suits. Despite Zenger`s admission of a pernicious publication and the lack of a discernible legal defense, the jury acquitted him. Although our culture often overlooks this point, it should be immediately obvious that these two views on what is meant by secular law are contradictory. A law free from religious influence is not a neutral law between different worldviews. If the law is free from religious influence, it is because religious beliefs have been systematically and deliberately excluded from contributing to this law. A law free from religious influence is not a secular right; It is a secular law. What Rawls seeks to offer is a secular narrative of justice, a representation of justice based solely on reason and which, as he reformulated in his later work Political Liberalism, is acceptable to both those who believe in God and those who do not.
 Rawls strives to be the philosopher who gives voice to neutral secular liberalism. Yet there are at least two problems with Rawls` secular liberalism. As a philosophy, secularism seeks to interpret life on the basis of principles derived exclusively from the material world, without resorting to religion. It shifts attention from religion to “temporal” and material concerns.  Secularism is most often defined as the separation of religion from civil affairs and the state, and can be extended to a similar position to suppress or minimize the role of religion in any public sphere.  The term “secularism” has a wide range of meanings and can summarize in the most schematic way any attitude that promotes secularism in a particular context.   This can mean anticlericalism, atheism, naturalism, non-sectarianism, neutrality in religious matters or the complete removal of religious symbols from public institutions.  To summarize: first, secular law in the sense of a neutral law in religious matters is impossible; and, secondly, a secular law is possible in the sense of a law that is not dominated by the institutional Church; And now, thirdly, secular law is indispensable.