Law Commons^™

Parading The Horribles: The Risks Of Expanding Religious Exemptions, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

People of faith now have a constitutional right to practice their religion—even when doing so conflicts with a government law or policy — that is more rigorously protected than nearly any other right. Some states have passed bills that provide an even broader right to such “religious exemptions” from the law than provided under the U.S. Constitution. Other religious exemption bills have been introduced and await consideration.

A Religious Right To Abortion: Legal History And Analysis, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

There is a long and rich history of religious support, across a wide range of faith traditions, for the right to reproductive autonomy, including abortion. A number of religious denominations, including the Presbyterian Church, Reform and Conservative Judaism, the United Church of Christ, and the Unitarian Universalist Association, support a legal right to abortion in most or all circumstances. Several religious denominations have even — long before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization — issued statements explaining that the right to reproductive health care is an essential aspect of their members’ religious …

The Legal Origins Of Catholic Conscientious Objection, Jeremy K. Kessler

Faculty Scholarship

This Article traces the origins of Catholic conscientious objection as a theory and practice of American constitutionalism. It argues that Catholic conscientious objection emerged during the 1960s from a confluence of left-wing and right-wing Catholic efforts to participate in American democratic culture more fully. The refusal of the American government to allow legitimate Catholic conscientious objection to the Vietnam War became a cause célèbre for clerical and lay leaders and provided a blueprint for Catholic legal critiques of other forms of federal regulation in the late 1960s and early 1970s — most especially regulations concerning the provision of contraception and …

Religion's Ascension To A Top-Tier Right During Covid: New Report Unpacks The Supreme Court’S Recent Religious Liberty Cases, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

A new report released by The Law, Rights, and Religion Project (LRRP) at Columbia Law School — We The People (of Faith): The Supremacy of Religious Rights in the Shadow of a Pandemic — shows how the Supreme Court’s COVID-era opinions have created a hierarchy of constitutional rights, with religious rights at the top. This legal regime will have a resounding impact on U.S. law, affecting policymakers’ ability to protect public health, prevent discrimination, and secure labor rights long after the current COVID-19 crisis has abated.

In Fulton Decision, Scotus Solidifies Expansion Of Religious Exercise Rights, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

On June 17, 2021, the Supreme Court solidified a dramatic shift in its reading of the constitutional protections for religious liberty. The Court ruled that religious organizations that contract with local governments to provide foster care services should be exempted from compliance with city non-discrimination requirements if the city permits any discretionary exemptions from those laws.

Religion, Conscience, And The Law: Reasons, Bases, And Limits For Exemptions, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

Kent Greenawalt discusses the permissibility, scope, and rationale for law to provide exemptions to protect religious and nonreligious conscience in the United States. It may be difficult for the law to determine which sentiments amount to conscience given differences in individuals’ perception and the strength of their convictions. Even the notion of a religious conscience is complex. Religious citizens’ conclusions about matters of interest to religion may proceed from both religion and reason, or only from reason. It is not clear what should count as religious, given differences between denominations and their ideas over time. There are a host of …

Propertied Rites, Kellen R. Funk

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay reviews Jack Rakove’s Beyond Belief, Beyond Conscience and Winnifred Fallers Sullivan’s Church State Corporation with an eye towards the complex management of religious property in U.S. constitutional doctrine. Part I summarizes Rakove’s book and highlights its value in the context of recent scholarship on early American legislative theory. Part II critiques Rakove’s turn from description towards advocacy of James Madison’s liberal protestant political theology. Part III summarizes Sullivan’s book as a particularly potent rebuttal to Rakove’s. Part IV takes up Sullivan’s method to consider the most recent crisis of religious property before the Supreme Court, that of government …

Legal Scholars & Theologians Partner On An Ambitious Vision For Religious Liberty, Elizabeth Reiner Platt

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Oct. 6, 2020—To safeguard the right to religious freedom, the next presidential administration must end the hyper-surveillance of Muslims, welcome religious refugees, protect land sacred to Native communities, restore church-state separation, and withdraw policies that favor particular religious beliefs, argues a new report co-authored by the Law, Rights, and Religion Project at Columbia University (LRRP) and Auburn Seminary.

Major Federal Court Victory For Religious Liberty Rights Of Immigrants' Rights Activists, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

On Monday afternoon, February 3, 2020, U.S. District Court judge Rosemary Márquez issued a sweeping opinion in which she granted the religious liberty defenses raised by four activists working with the Southern Arizona group No More Deaths/No Más Muertes. The opinion reversed an earlier ruling in the case by Magistrate Judge Bernardo Velasco in which he had found the activists guilty of violating federal law for leaving water and food in the desert for migrants in the Cabrieza Prieta National Wildlife Area, a federally controlled refuge in the Southern Arizona desert where human remains of migrants are frequently found. The …

Democracy & Religion: Some Variations & Hard Questions, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

The ideas sketched here concern the nonestablishment and free exercise norms expressed in the U.S. Constitution, their application to governmental institutions from legislatures to prisons and the military, the place of religion in the curricula of public schools, and the proper role of religious convictions in lawmaking. A major concern of the essay is the problem of achieving an appropriate balance between governmental neutrality toward religion, as required by the nonestablishment norm, and governmental accommodation of religious practices that would otherwise violate ordinary laws, as required by the free exercise norm. A recurring theme is the complexity of the issues …

All Faiths & None: A Guide To Protecting Religious Liberty For Everyone, Elizabeth Reiner Platt, Katherine M. Franke, Keisha E. Mckenzie, Katharine Rhodes Henderson

Faculty Scholarship

Religious liberty rights have been immeasurably damaged over the past several years — often in the name of protecting religious liberty.

Government officials have embraced Islamophobic policies and rhetoric; shut the door on refugees fleeing religious persecution; elevated the religious rights of their political allies over the rights — religious and otherwise — of other communities; used religion as a tool of economic deregulation; and denigrated the beliefs of religious minorities, atheists, and religious progressives.

To achieve true freedom for those of all faiths and none, a complete overhaul of religious liberty policy, and a new understanding of what this …

New Report Surveys Extent Of Religious Liberty Activism On The Left, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

New York, New York — A report released today from the Law, Rights, and Religion Project at Columbia Law School offers a sweeping account of religious liberty activism undertaken by social justice and humanitarian movements while demonstrating how right-wing activists have fought for conservative Christian hegemony rather than religious liberty for all. It thus challenges the leading popular narrative of religious freedom.

Legal Scholars File Brief In Case In Which The Department Of Justice Rejects Religious Liberty Rights Of Non-Profit That Provides Safe Space To Injection Drug Users, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Nationally recognized law professors with expertise in religious liberty law filed an amicus brief in a case in which the U.S. Justice Department is seeking to shut down safe-injection sites. The case focuses on the work of a Philadelphia-based nonprofit, Safehouse, a faith-based non-profit that provides people who inject drugs with sterile equipment to minimize the spread of blood-borne illnesses, and to support harm reduction for persons who use injectable drugs.

Law Professors File Amicus Brief On Religious Liberty Rights In Appeal From Criminal Conviction Of Az Immigrants Rights Activists, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Nationally recognized law professors with expertise in religious liberty law filed an amicus brief in the appeal of the convictions of four sanctuary activists who were found guilty in January of the crime of leaving water and food in the desert for migrants. The activists were volunteers with the group No More Deaths/No Más Muertes, and have petitioned a federal court in Arizona to reverse their conviction after a three-day trial.

Professor Katherine Franke Joins An Amicus Brief In Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania And New Jersey V. Trump, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

On Monday, March 25th, Professor Katherine Franke, Faculty Director of the Law, Rights, and Religion Project at Columbia Law School, joined an amicus brief in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and New Jersey v. Trump,* a challenge to two rules that exempt employers with religious or moral objections from compliance with the contraceptive coverage requirement of the Affordable Care Act.

Columbia Law Professor Comments On Federal Court Conviction Of Four Migrants' Rights Activists For Leaving Water And Food In The Arizona Desert, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

On Friday afternoon, January 18, 2019, Magistrate Judge Bernardo Velasco found four activists with the group No More Deaths/No Más Muertes guilty of violating federal law for leaving water and food in the desert for migrants in the Cabrieza Pietra National Wildlife Area, a federally controlled refuge in the Southern Arizona desert where human remains of migrants are frequently found. The case signals the Trump administration’s resolve to prosecute migrants’ rights activists as aggressively as possible, even in relatively minor cases such as this one where the activists were charged with what amounts to “littering.”

Peril And Possibility: Strikes, Rights, And Legal Change In The Era Of Trump, Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

Thank you, I am delighted to be here. When Professor Fisk and the editors of the Journal asked if I would be willing to give the Feller Lecture this year, I did not hesitate for a moment. It goes without saying that, for a labor law professor, to give a lecture that commemorates David Feller is truly a special honor. While I never had the chance to meet him, his work as an advocate and scholar serves as an example for everyone in the field. I am grateful to the Journal and to the Feller family for the opportunity to …

Speech And Exercise By Private Individuals And Organizations, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

A central issue about redundancy concerns how far the exercise of religion is simply a form of speech that is, and should be, constitutionally protected only to the extent that reaches speech generally. Insofar as a constitutional analysis leaves flexibility, we have questions about wise legislative choices. To consider these issues carefully, we need to have a sense of what counts as relevant speech and the exercise of religion. That is the focus of this article.

It addresses the basic categorization of what counts as “speech” for freedom of speech and what counts as religious exercise when each is engaged …

Is Korematsu Good Law?, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

In Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court claimed to overrule its infamous Korematsu decision. This Essay argues that this claim is both empty and grotesque. It is empty because a decision to overrule a prior case is not meaningful unless it specifies which propositions the Court is disavowing. Korematsu stands for many propositions, not all of which are agreed upon, but the Hawaii Court underspecifies what it meant to overrule. The Court’s claim of overruling Korematsu is grotesque because its emptiness means to conceal its disturbing affinity with that case.

Whose Faith Matters? The Fight For Religious Liberty Beyond The Christian Right, Elizabeth Reiner Platt, Katherine M. Franke, Kira Shepherd, Lilia Hadjiivanova

Faculty Scholarship

By offering a sweeping account of religious liberty activism being undertaken by numerous progressive humanitarian and social justice movements, and uncovering how right-wing activists have fought for conservative Christian hegemony rather than “religious liberty” more generally, this report challenges the leading popular narrative of religious freedom.

Religion, Discrimination, And Government Funding: Enforcing Civil Rights Law After Masterpiece Cakeshop And Trinity Lutheran, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

A memorandum published by the Law, Rights, and Religion Project at Columbia Law School (formerly the Public Rights/Private Conscience Project) that clarifies the responsibility of state and local human rights agencies and commissions to robustly enforce civil rights laws — particularly in the context of government-funded social services — in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission and Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer

Professor Katherine Franke Files Amicus Briefs On Religious Liberty Claims Raised In Federal Prosecutions Of Activists In Arizona Who Left Water And Food In Desert For Migrants, Elizabeth Boylan

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

On November 13, 2018, Katherine Franke, Sulzbacher Professor of Law, Gender and Sexuality Studies at Columbia University, submitted amicus briefs on behalf of seven scholars of religious liberty law in two cases in which the federal government is prosecuting members of the Tucson-based group No More Deaths/No Más Muertes.

Professors Of Law And Religion File Brief Supporting Arizona Immigration Rights Activist's Use Of Rfra As A Defense To Federal Criminal Prosecution, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

June 21, 2018: Today, five prominent professors of law and religion filed an amicus brief in support of Dr. Scott Warren, a humanitarian aid worker who faces up to twenty years in prison for providing food and shelter to migrants crossing the Arizona desert. The amicus was filed in an Arizona federal court, and contends that Dr. Warren is entitled to an accommodation from being criminally prosecuted for acting on his sincerely held religious beliefs.

New Report Details Consequences Of Trump Administration’S Overly Broad Guidance On Religious Liberty, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project, Center For American Progress

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

April 3, 2018, Washington, D.C. – Obama-era rules prohibiting discrimination in dozens of federal programs could be undermined by the Trump administration’s controversial guidance on religious liberty, according to a new report from the Center for American Progress and Columbia Law School’s Public Rights/Private Conscience Project.

Comment On U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services Rule, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

In medical facilities across the country, doctors whose conscience would require them to perform a sterilization on a patient who requests one, offer truthful information about accessing abortion services, or provide comprehensive LGBTQ+ health care are forbidden from doing so by their employer. The conscience of such medical providers is entirely ignored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s (HHS) recently proposed rule that purports to “ensure that persons or entities” providing health care “are not subjected to certain practices or policies that violate conscience, coerce, or discriminate.” As explained in a comment submitted today by the Columbia …

Bearing Faith: The Limits Of Catholic Health Care For Women Of Color, Kira Shepherd, Elizabeth Reiner Platt, Katherine M. Franke, Elizabeth Boylan

Faculty Scholarship

This study finds that in nineteen out of the thirty-four states/territories that we studied, women of color are more likely than white women to give birth at hospitals bound by the ERDs. Women of color’s disproportionate reliance on Catholic hospitals in these states increases their exposure to restrictions that place religious ideology over best medical practices.

To determine whether women of color disproportionately give birth at hospitals operating under the ERDs, we compared the percentage of births to women of color at Catholic and non-Catholic hospitals. In over half of the states we studied (19 out of 33 states plus …

Religious Liberty For A Select Few, Sharita Gruberg, Frank J. Bewkes, Elizabeth Reiner Platt, Katherine M. Franke, Claire Markham

Faculty Scholarship

This report discusses how the Department of Justice’s guidance opens the door to an extreme rewriting of the concept of religious liberty. The guidance — and the numerous agency rules, enforcement actions, and policies that it is influencing — will shift the balance of individual religious protections across the federal government toward a new framing that allows religious beliefs to be used as a weapon against minority groups.

Dignity Denied: Religious Exemptions And Lgbt Elder Services, Movement Advancement Project (Map), Public Rights/Private Conscience Project, Sage - Advocacy Services For Lgbt Elders

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

LGBT older adults, like many older Americans in the United States, rely on a network of service providers as they age–for community programming and congregate meals, for health care, and for housing ranging from independent living to skilled nursing. Research finds that a majority of these services are offered by religiously affiliated organizations.

While many of these religiously affiliated facilities provide quality care for millions of older adults, there is a coordinated effort to pass religious exemption laws, issue executive orders and agency guidance, and to litigate court cases to allow individuals, businesses, and even government contractors and grantees to …

Columbia Law Experts Denounce Doj Religious Liberty Guidance As Attack On Religious Liberty And Fundamental Equality Rights, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Columbia Law School’s Public Rights/Private Conscience Project (PRPCP) denounces the memorandum released today by the Department of Justice (DOJ) entitled the “Federal Memorandum for Religious Liberty Protections.” This document, and its implementation guidance misinterpret the meaning and scope of religious liberty under the Constitution and the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), demonstrating this administration’s continued commitment to elevating a particular set of religious beliefs over the safety and equality rights of women, LGBTQ people, people of color, and religious minorities.

Joint Statement By The Council On American-Islamic Relations Of New York & Columbia Law School’S Public Rights/Private Conscience Project, Council On American-Islamic Relations Of New York, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

As advocates for free exercise of religion, civil rights, and religious pluralism, we are deeply concerned that President Trump’s recently signed Executive Order “Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty” will serve to limit, not protect, religious freedom. The order was signed on May 4, 2017, in a ceremony that included Christian musician Steven Curtis Chapman and statements by Pentecostal televangelist Paula White, Baptist Pastor Jack Graham, Catholic Archbishop Donald Wuerl, Rabbi Marvin Heir, and Vice President Mike Pence. While the executive order — unlike a prior leaked draft — does not single out particular religious beliefs for special protection, we …