Professor Rik Torfs (University of Leuven), in his keynote lecture in EuARe Conference (Vienna, 2025) underlined the concerning, current trends that are challenging freedom of religion. According to him, victimhood and emotionality are increasingly emphasized in the legal arena. One of the outcomes of this trend is more pressure on religious groups to redefine their doctrine. While emotional narratives need to be taken seriously, their subjective nature adds an important challenge to scientific community: legislative and jurisdictional measures taken against any religion should nevertheless rely on objective, verifiable standards, supplied by expert research and empirical data. This paper addresses the underlining factors behind legal cases against minority religions, addressing specifically cases against Jehovah's Witnesses. The presentation starts with a discussion in the concept of religious illiteracy which, at worst, is more than ignorance; it's a pattern of interpretive mistakes. It manifests in a) category errors b) doctrinal caricature and c) neglect of due diligence. This paper suggests that these different aspects of religious literacy may have played a role in some of the recent legal disputes against religions. As a specific case study, the deregistration of Jehovah's Witnesses in Norway will be discussed. The Appeal Court (2025) and Supreme Court (2026) decisions will be reviewed. My purpose is to analyze the rationale behind the initial argumentations against Witnesses, the Court's decisions, and the scholarly response to the case. I'll close the discussion with a practical proposal on academic research, media literacy and understanding of the religious context as a structural response to disinformation and stereotypes.