Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson
The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson
Marquette Law Review
The Supreme Court’s attempt to create a standard for evaluating whether the Establishment Clause is violated by religious governmental speech, such as the public display of the Ten Commandments or the Pledge of Allegiance, is a total failure. The Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence has been termed “convoluted,” “a muddled mess,” and “a polite lie.” Unwilling to either allow all governmental religious speech or ban it entirely, the Court is in need of a coherent standard for distinguishing the permissible from the unconstitutional. Thus far, no Justice has offered such a standard.
A careful reading of the history of the framing …
The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson
The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson
All Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s attempt to create a standard for evaluating whether the Establishment Clause is violated by religious governmental speech, such as the public display of the Ten Commandments or the Pledge of Allegiance, is a total failure. The Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence has been termed “convoluted,” “a muddled mess,” and “a polite lie.” Unwilling to either allow all governmental religious speech or ban it entirely, the Court is in need of a coherent standard for distinguishing the permissible from the unconstitutional. Thus far, no Justice has offered such a standard.
A careful reading of the history of the framing …
Putting Religious Symbolism In Context: A Linguistic Critique Of The Endorsement Test, B. Jessie Hill
Putting Religious Symbolism In Context: A Linguistic Critique Of The Endorsement Test, B. Jessie Hill
Michigan Law Review
The treatment of Establishment Clause challenges to displays of religious symbolism by the Supreme Court and the lower courts is notoriously unpredictable: a crèche is constitutionally acceptable if it is accompanied by a Santa Claus house and reindeer, a Christmas tree, and various circus figures, but unacceptable if it is accompanied by poinsettias, a "peace tree," or a wreath, a tree, and a plastic Santa Claus. A menorah may be displayed next to a Christmas tree, or next to Kwanzaa symbols, Santa Claus, and Frosty the Snowman, but not next to a crèche and a Christmas tree. A number of …
A Holy Mess: School Prayer, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act Of Texas, And The First Amendment., David S. Stolle
A Holy Mess: School Prayer, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act Of Texas, And The First Amendment., David S. Stolle
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, the U.S. Supreme Court held the traditional compelling state interest standard for Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence should be replaced by a new test requiring a statute or government action to be facially neutral and generally applicable. In response to Smith, Congress, relying on its Enforcement Clause powers under the Fourteenth Amendment, attempted to resurrect the compelling state interest standard by passing the Religious Freedom of Restoration Act (RFRA). In June 1999, the Texas legislature passed the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act (TRFRA). This Comment argues the TRFRA is unnecessary …
God Is Dead: Killed By Fifty Years Of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence., Raul M. Rodriguez
God Is Dead: Killed By Fifty Years Of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence., Raul M. Rodriguez
St. Mary's Law Journal
In 1980, the Supreme Court in Stone v. Graham addressed the issue of whether a statute requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in all public school classrooms was an unconstitutional establishment of religion. Applying the Lemon test the Court found the statute’s purpose to be religious and ruled it unconstitutional. Yet, had the state required the placement of the following “secular commandments” in every classroom, it is unlikely the Court would have found an Establishment Clause violation. Stone illustrates what the Supreme Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence has become. The Court has misconstrued the meaning of the “establishment of religion” …