Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Heffron V. International Society For Krishna Consciousness Inc.: A Restrictive Constitutional View Of The Proselytizing Rights Of Religious Organizations , Michael M. Greenburg
Heffron V. International Society For Krishna Consciousness Inc.: A Restrictive Constitutional View Of The Proselytizing Rights Of Religious Organizations , Michael M. Greenburg
Pepperdine Law Review
The persistent efforts of religious organizations to reach their public have consistently been met with governmental limitation due to the often conflicting interests of public order, and free speech and expression. Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. represents the Court's latest redefinition of the extent of permissible limitations upon the activities of these groups. The author examines the decision in light of the traditional criteria for permissible time, place, and manner restrictions upon free speech and evaluates the Court's implementation of these restrictions with respect to the activities of the Krishna group. The impact of the decision upon …
A New Standard Of Review In Free Exercise Cases: Thomas V. Review Board Of The Indiana Employment & Security Division, Lynn Mccutchen Gardner
A New Standard Of Review In Free Exercise Cases: Thomas V. Review Board Of The Indiana Employment & Security Division, Lynn Mccutchen Gardner
Pepperdine Law Review
In Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, the United States Supreme Court was called upon to clarify the appropriate level of review to be applied in cases which examine the first amendment right to free exercise of religion. The Court ruled that the "compelling state interest" test is the proper standard to be used. The Court also accorded first amendment protection to beliefs which are not shared by other members of a religious group and which are instead the unique interpretation of an individual member and not acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others.
Public Policy Against Religion: Doubting Thomas , Richard H. Seeburger
Public Policy Against Religion: Doubting Thomas , Richard H. Seeburger
Pepperdine Law Review
In free exercise cases, the Supreme Court has adopted a least restrictive alternative test in an attempt to maximize protection for religiously motivated practices. Because the least restrictive alternative test only considers the importance of the governmental interest and the availability of alternative means to accomplish those interests, thereby ignoring the importance of the burdened religious activity to the individual and the degree of burden on religious activity, all religious interests are treated equally when asserted against a governmental interest. Under such an inflexible and brittle test, the Supreme Court has recently denied religious claims which had previously been recognized. …