August 18, 2026

How LDS Church Lawsuit Over “Mormon” Could Bite Back

By Emily Poler

Several weeks ago I was writing about a hiking drag queen influencer. Today, it’s the Mormon church. How did I get here? I have no idea, but wherever you go in the world of trademark infringement, there you are. In fact, the drag queen and the Mormon cases even have something in common as they both involve a large entity suing a much smaller one for infringement.

In the case of the latter (pun intended), the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the “LDS Church”) recently brought a case against Dr. John Dehlin, his podcast and website that have operated under the name “Mormon Stories” since 2005, and his Open Stories Foundation, the nonprofit that funds his work. According to the website’s homepage, “Mormon Stories” is a “community where your doubts and questions are valued and understood.” That community includes criticism of the LDS Church, along with fervent support for LGBTQ+ Mormons. 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is, of course, the world’s largest Mormon denomination, and its lawyers claim (among other things) that the name “Mormon Stories” and a logo used by the podcast infringe on the church’s trademarks, including its trademark in the word “Mormon.” The filing asserts that this has and will continue to cause people to believe that the podcast and website are affiliated with the church and/or endorsed by it, or cause consumers to be confused. On the confusion point, the complaint presents a number of comments from social media where people listened to the podcast believing it was affiliated with the church, but then realized that the podcast was, in fact, critical of the LDS and not in line with official doctrine. 

The Defendants counter by accusing the Church of “attempting to use intellectual property law to restrict lawful commentary about Mormonism” and have moved to dismiss the trademark infringement claim on grounds that it is barred by the First Amendment. Here, they point to Rogers v. Grimaldi, which held that in the context of the name of creative work, trademark concerns have to yield to the First Amendment unless the Defendant’s use of a mark is completely irrelevant to the underlying work and explicitly misleads consumers about the source or content of the work. In this case, the word “Mormon” is required to describe what the podcast and website are about. Defendants also note that they are not misleading consumers, as they “include written disclaimers on their websites, YouTube channel, and other podcast distribution platforms.” 

At the heart of the Defendants’ defense, however, is their focus on the fact that “Mormon” does more than refer to the LDS Church. As the ACLU puts it in the amicus brief it submitted in support of the Defendants, the “word ‘Mormon’ is not a source identifier. It is a term that describes an entire ethnoreligious culture, tradition, and people, many of whom are not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.” In other words, all LDS are Mormons, but not all Mormons are LDS, and in its brief the ACLU describes myriad religious communities that use the name “Mormon.” In fact, the Defendants are seeking to cancel the church’s trademark in the word “Mormon.” Oh, snap.  

And thus, the LDS Church’s lawsuit seems like it could have opened up a can of worms they’d rather have remained closed. Moreover, some of those other Mormon denominations have had their own well-documented problems with the LDS (and, for that matter, the law, see Warren Jeffs). Litigation here is likely to include an exploration of those various groups, their history, and how they use the word that the LDS Church claims it owns. That could make it difficult for the LDS to continue to claim trademark rights to that word and end up with people talking about things that the LDS Church would probably rather not have discussed. They could end up the big losers here.

Also, talking about the legal basics of trademark infringement, why has the Church waited so long? They’ve allowed the Mormon Stories podcast and website to operate for more than 20 years, and as we know, the more lax you are in defending your trademark, the harder it is to protect. (This is why Patagonia quickly brought its lawsuit against Pattie Gonia rather than let her continue to use her versions of the mark.) In fact, Defendants claim the Church has “publicly abandoned” its trademark. For a massive organization with an army of attorneys, that seems pretty irresponsible, and it may be difficult to explain away to a judge.