Law Commons^™

Religion And Group Rights: Are Churches (Just) Like The Boy Scouts?, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

What role do religious communities, groups, and associations play - and, what role should they play - in our thinking and conversations about religious freedom and church-state relations? These and related questions - that is, questions about the rights and responsibilities of religious institutions - are timely, difficult, and important. And yet, they are often neglected.

It is not new to observe that American judicial decisions and public conversations about religious freedom tend to focus on matters of individuals' rights, beliefs, consciences, and practices. The special place, role, and freedoms of groups, associations, and institutions are often overlooked. However, if …

Pluralism, Dialogue, And Freedom: Professor Robert Rodes And The Church-State Nexus, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

The idea of church-state separation and the image of a wall are at the heart of nearly every citizen's and commentator's thinking about law and religion, and about faith and public life. Unfortunately, the inapt image often causes great confusion about the important idea. What should be regarded as an important feature of religious freedom under constitutionally limited government too often serves simply as a slogan, and is too often employed as a rallying cry, not for the distinctiveness and independence of religious institutions, but for the marginalization and privatization of religious faith.

How, then, should we understand church-state separation? …

Church, State, And The Practice Of Love, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

In his first encyclical letter, Deus caritas est, Pope Benedict XVI describes the Church as a community of love. In this letter, he explores the organized practice love by and through the Church, and the relationship between this practice, on the one hand, and the Church's commitment to the just ordering of the State and society, on the other. God is love, he writes. This paper considers the implications of this fact for the inescapably complicated nexus of church-state relations in our constitutional order.

The specific goal for this paper is to draw from Deus caritas est some insight into …

Beguiled: Free Exercise Exemptions And The Siren Song Of Liberalism, Gerard V. Bradley

Gerard V. Bradley

No abstract provided.

Corporations, Taxes, And Religion: The Hobby Lobby And Conestoga Contraceptive Cases, Steven J. Willis

UF Law Faculty Publications

Beginning in 2013, the federal government mandated that general business corporations include contraceptive and early abortion coverage in large employee health plans. Internal Revenue Code Section 4980D imposes a substantial excise tax on health plans violating the mandate. Indeed, for one company – Hobby Lobby – the expected annual tax is nearly one-half billion dollars. Dozens of “for profit” businesses have challenged the mandate on free exercise grounds, asserting claims under the First Amendment as well as under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

So far, courts have been reluctant to hold corporations have religious rights of their own; as a …

The First Amendment: Religious Freedom For All, Including Muslims, Asma Uddin

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

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

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.

The Naked Private Square, Ronald J. Colombo

Ronald J Colombo

In the latter half of the twentieth century, America witnessed the construction of a “wall of separation” between religion and the public square. What had once been commonplace (such as prayer in public schools, and religious symbols on public property) had suddenly become verboten. This phenomenon is well known and has been well studied.

Less well known (and less well studied) has been the parallel phenomenon of religion’s expulsion from the private square. Employment law, corporate law, and constitutional law have worked to impede the ability of business enterprises to adopt, pursue, and maintain distinctively religious personae. This is undesirable …

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. …