Law Commons^™

Symposium Introduction: The Religion Clauses In The 21st Century, William P. Marshall, Vivian E. Hamilton, John E. Taylor

Vivian E. Hamilton

No abstract provided.

Inappropriate For Establishment Clause Scrutiny: Reflections On Mary Nobles Hancock’S, God Save The United States And This Honorable County Board Of Commissioners: Lund, Bormuth, And The Fight Over Legislative Prayer, Samuel W. Calhoun

Samuel W. Calhoun

This Response to Mary Nobles Hancock’s Note, after noting the complexity of the issues she presents, briefly comments on Ms. Hancock’s analysis, which focuses on how current Supreme Court doctrine should be applied to legislative prayer. Part III ranges more broadly. The author's basic position is that the Supreme Court has long misconstrued the Establishment Clause. This misinterpretation in turn has led the Court mistakenly to interpose itself into the realm of legislative prayer, an incursion the Founders never intended.

Jews And The Culture Wars: Consensus And Dissensus In Jewish Religious Liberty Advocacy, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

When Judges Are Theologians: Adjudicating Religious Questions, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

Implied Consent To Religious Institutions: A Primer And A Defense, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

A Critique Of Hobby Lobby And The Supreme Court's Hands-Off Approach To Religion, Samuel J. Levine

Samuel J. Levine

Over the past several decades, the United States Supreme Court has demonstrated an increasing refusal to engage in a close evaluation of the religious nature of Free Exercise and Establishment Clause claims, instead deferring to adherents’ characterizations of the substance and significance of a religious practice or belief. The Supreme Court’s hands-off approach, which it has justified on both constitutional and practical grounds, has attracted considerable scholarly attention, producing a substantial and growing body of literature assessing and, at times, critiquing the Court’s approach.

Part I of this Essay provides a brief overview for analyzing the Supreme Court’s hands-off approach …

A Critique Of Hobby Lobby And The Supreme Court's Hands-Off Approach To Religion, Samuel J. Levine

Samuel J. Levine

Over the past several decades, the United States Supreme Court has demonstrated an increasing refusal to engage in a close evaluation of the religious nature of Free Exercise and Establishment Clause claims, instead deferring to adherents’ characterizations of the substance and significance of a religious practice or belief. The Supreme Court’s hands-off approach, which it has justified on both constitutional and practical grounds, has attracted considerable scholarly attention, producing a substantial and growing body of literature assessing and, at times, critiquing the Court’s approach.Part I of this Essay provides a brief overview for analyzing the Supreme Court’s hands-off approach to …

Silence Is Golden: Moments Of Silence, Legislative Prayers, And The Establishment Clause, Eric Segall

Eric J. Segall

No abstract provided.

Free Exercise Of Religion Before The Bench: Empirical Evidence From The Federal Courts, Michael Heise, Gregory C. Sisk

Michael Heise

We analyze various factors that influence judicial decisions in cases involving Free Exercise Clause or religious accommodation claims and decided by lower federal courts. Religious liberty claims, including those moored in the Free Exercise Clause, typically generate particularly difficult questions about how best to structure the sometimes contentious relation between the religious faithful and the sovereign government. Such difficult questions arise frequently in and are often framed by litigation. Our analyses include all digested Free Exercise and religious accommodation claim decisions by federal court of appeals and district court judges from 1996 through 2005. As it relates to one key …

Religion, School, And Judicial Decision Making: An Empirical Perspective, Michael Heise, Gregory C. Sisk

Michael Heise

We analyze various influences on judicial outcomes favoring religion in cases involving elementary and secondary schools and decided by lower federal courts. A focus on religion in the school context is warranted as the most difficult and penetrating questions about the proper relationship between Church and State have arisen with special frequency, controversy, and fervor in the often-charged atmosphere of education. Schools and the Religion Clauses collide persistently, and litigation frames many of these collisions. Also, the frequency and magnitude of these legal collisions increase as various policy initiatives increasingly seek to leverage private and religious schools in the service …

Hostility Toward Religion And The Rise And Decline Of Constitutionally Protected Religious Speech, Ralph Mawdsley, Charles Russo

Charles J. Russo

No abstract provided.

The "Blaine" Debate: Must States Fund Religious Schools?, Laura S. Underkuffler

Laura S. Underkuffler

In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, the United States Supreme Court held-by a vote of 5 to 4-that the funding of religious schools with taxpayer money through voucher programs does not violate the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. Emboldened by this success, voucher proponents now attack state constitutional provisions (often called "Blaine Amendments") that prohibit taxpayer funding of religious schools. These state provisions, which may stand in the way of religious-school voucher programs, are attacked as violative of the federal Constitution, rooted in anti-religious bias, or otherwise illegal or unwise. It is my view that efforts to force states to …

Public Funding For Religious Schools: Difficulties And Dangers In A Pluralistic Society, Laura S. Underkuffler

Laura S. Underkuffler

No abstract provided.

The Price Of Vouchers For Religious Freedom, Laura S. Underkuffler

Laura S. Underkuffler

No abstract provided.

Through A Glass Darkly: Van Orden, Mccreary, And The Dangers Of Transparency In Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Laura S. Underkuffler

Laura S. Underkuffler

No abstract provided.

The Challenge Of Co-Religionist Commerce, Michael A. Helfand, Barak D. Richman

Michael A Helfand

This Article addresses the rise of “co-religionist commerce” in the United States—that is, the explosion of commercial dealings that take place between co-religionists who intend their transactions to achieve both commercial and religious objectives. To remain viable, co-religionist commerce requires all the legal support necessary to sustain all other commercial relationships. Contracts must be enforced, parties must be protected against torts, and disputes must be reliably adjudicated.

Under current constitutional doctrine, co-religionist commercial agreements must be translated into secular terminology if there are to be judicially enforced. However, religious goods and services often cannot be accurately translated without religious terms …

Religious Freedom, Church-State Separation, & The Ministerial Exception, Carl H. Esbeck, Thomas C. Berg, Kimberlee Wood Colby, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

The Hosanna-Tabor case concerns the separation of church and state, an arrangement that is often misunderstood but is nevertheless a critical dimension of the freedom of religion protected by the First Amendment to our Constitution. For nearly a thousand years, the tradition of Western constitutionalism - the project of protecting political freedom by marking boundaries to the power of government - has been assisted by the principled commitment to religious liberty and to church-state separation, correctly understood. A community that respects - as ours does - both the importance of, and the distinction between, the spheres of political and religious …

Accommodation, Establishment, And Freedom Of Religion, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

This short essay engages the argument that it would violate the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause to exempt an ordinary, nonreligious, profit-seeking business – such as Hobby Lobby – from the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive-coverage rules. In response to this argument, it is emphasized that the First Amendment not only permits but invites generous, religion-specific accommodations and exemptions and that the Court’s Smith decision does not teach otherwise. In addition, this essay proposes that laws and policies that promote and protect religious freedom should be seen as having a “secular purpose” and that because religious freedom, like clean air, is an …

Is Prayer Constitutional At Municipal Council Meetings?, Thomas A. Schweitzer

Thomas A. Schweitzer

The author discusses Galloway v. Town of Greece, a case which challenges official prayers at town council meetings. To provide the necessary background information for understanding the issues in Galloway, the author begins with a brief discussion of two other cases, Lemon v. Kurtzman and Marsh v. Chambers. The author then examines the district and circuit court decisions in Galloway and the Establishment Clause issues posed by the case. Next, the author notes issues raised by other lower court decisions involving legislative prayer after Marsh. Towards the end of the article, to clarify and decide the constitutional issues, the author …

Religious Freedom And Workers’ Compensation - Big Sky Colony V Montana Department Of Labor And Industry, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

Social security and health care litigation has played a prominent role in the development of the jurisprudence concerning the religious clauses of the US Constitution. At the time of writing further litigation in this area is ongoing with initial rulings having been handed down in relation to challenges concerning the compatibility of the PPACA’s contraceptive mandate with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). This note considers an interesting recent decision of the Montana supreme court which considered the constitutionality of an extension of coverage under the Montana workers’ compensation code to colonies of the Hutterite (or Hutterian or Hutterische) Brethren …

The New Religious Institutionalism Meets The Old Establishment Clause, Gregory P. Magarian

Gregory P. Magarian

Recent religious liberty scholarship spotlights the legal rights of churches and similar religious institutions, as distinct from the rights of individual religious believers. Advocates of “the new religious institutionalism” argue that religious institutions need robust legal rights in order to effectuate their institutional functions and advance religious believers’ interests. The Supreme Court recently fanned the new institutionalist flame by holding, in Hosanna Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC, that the Constitution protects churches from legal liability for employment discrimination in hiring ministers. In this essay, Professor Magarian considers a complication that advocates of the new religious institutionalism have generally ignored: …

Money And Power In Religious Competition: A Critique Of The Religious Free Market, Jianlin Chen

Jianlin Chen

Academics have frequently alluded to the normative value of the religious free market fostered by the twin legal guarantees of the free exercise of religion and the absence of state establishment of religion. This article challenges the idealized portrayal of a religion’s ‘flourish[ing] according to the zeal of its adherents and the appeal of its dogma’ and examines the dynamics of material wealth and political power in a religion’s success. This article suggests that controversial measures such as affirmative action for socio-economically disadvantaged religions and restrictions of religious involvement in politics are not necessarily incompatible with the religious free market.

The Passing Of Nonsectarianism--Some Reflections On The School Prayer Case, Robert E. Rodes

Robert Rodes

Engel v. Vitale was a landmark case which marked a jurisprudential shift in the constitutional meaning of the Establishment Clause. This paper, written in the aftermath of this important case, reflects on, and contrasts, England's historical establishment of the Church with historical nonsectarianism in the United States. After analyzing the role which the tripartite Protestant-Catholic-Jew nonsectariansm played in society before Engle, the paper suggests that nonsectarianism served the beneficial purpose of directing the whole institutional structure of society toward the last end of human beings. With the passing of nonsectarianism, the nation is left with the problem of accurately and …

Religion, Division, And The First Amendment, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Nearly thirty-five years ago, in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Chief Justice Warren Burger declared that state programs or policies could excessive(ly) - and, therefore, unconstitutionally - entangle government and religion, not only by requiring or allowing intrusive public monitoring of religious institutions and activities, but also through what he called their divisive political potential. Chief Justice Burger asserted also, and more fundamentally, that political division along religious lines was one of the principal evils against which the First Amendment was intended to protect. And from this Hobbesian premise about the inten(t) animating the First Amendment, he proceeded on the assumption that …

Judicial Enforcement Of The Establishment Clause, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

This paper is the author’s contribution to a roundtable conference, held in October of 2008 at Notre Dame Law School, devoted to Prof. Kent Greenawalt’s book, Religion and the Constitution: Establishment and Fairness. It is suggested that Greenawalt’s admirably context-sensitive approach to church-and-state questions might lead us to think that the best course for judges is to find (somehow) some bright-line, on-off “rules” and “tests”, constructed to identify and forbid the most obvious violations of the Religion Clause’s core (whatever that is), and to give up on -- or, perhaps, “underenforce” -- the rest.

The Disincorporation Proclamation: Emancipating The Establishment Clause From The Fourteenth Amendment, Martin Wishnatsky

Martin Wishnatsky

No abstract provided.

"Rfra Exemptions From The Contraception Mandate: An Unconstitutional Accommodation Of Religion", Frederick Mark Gedicks, Rebecca G. Van Tassell

Frederick Mark Gedicks

Litigation surrounding use of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to exempt employers from the Affordable Care Act’s “contraception mandate” is moving steadily towards eventual resolution in the U.S. Supreme Court. Both opponents and supporters of the mandate, however, have overlooked Establishment Clause limits on such exemptions. The fiery religious-liberty rhetoric surrounding the mandate has obscured that RFRA is a “permissive” rather than “mandatory” accommodation of religion—that is, a voluntary government concession to religious belief and practice that is not required by the Free Exercise Clause. Permissive accommodations must satisfy Establishment Clause constraints, notably the requirement that the accommodation not impose …

God Loves Flags, But I Don't: Why The Pledge Of Allegiance Is An American Travesty, Kyle T. Morrison

Kyle T Morrison

No abstract provided.

Religion's Footnote Four: Church Autonomy As Arbitration, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

While the Supreme Court’s decision in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC has been hailed as an unequivocal victory for religious liberty, the Court’s holding in footnote four – that the ministerial exception is an affirmative defense and not a jurisdictional bar – undermines decades of conventional thinking about the relationship between church and state. For some time, a wide range of scholars had conceptualized the relationship between religious institutions and civil courts as “jurisdictional” – that is, scholars converged on the view that the religion clauses deprived courts of subject-matter jurisdiction over religious claims. In turn, courts could not adjudicate religious disputes …

Litigating Religion, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

This article considers how parties should resolve disputes that turn on religious doctrine and practice – that is, how people should litigate religion. Under current constitutional doctrine, litigating religion is generally the task of two types of religious institutions: first, religious arbitration tribunals, whose decisions are protected by arbitration doctrine, and religious courts, whose decision are protected by the religion clauses. Such institutions have been thrust into playing this role largely because the religion clauses are currently understood to prohibit courts from resolving religious questions – that is, the “religious question” doctrine is currently understood to prohibit courts from litigating …