Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Supreme Court And Religious Liberty, Joseph D. Kearney
Thomas Jefferson And The Establishment Clause, Mark J. Chadsey
Thomas Jefferson And The Establishment Clause, Mark J. Chadsey
Akron Law Review
The purpose of this paper is to ask whether the historical record actually supports either of these assumptions. A note about my mode of analysis is necessary at this juncture. When inquiring about Jefferson’s influence on the Establishment Clause, it is important to focus on the entire process by which it was adopted rather than its mere introduction by Madison in the House of Representatives. Its adoption, after all, required the assent of two-thirds of both chambers of Congress, three-fourths of the state legislatures, and the support of a majority of the American public. Without the requisite support of all …
God And Guns: The Free Exercise Of Religion Problems Of Regulating Guns In Churches And Other Houses Of Worship, John M.A. Dipippa
God And Guns: The Free Exercise Of Religion Problems Of Regulating Guns In Churches And Other Houses Of Worship, John M.A. Dipippa
Marquette Law Review
This Article demonstrates that the cases raising religious liberty challenges to state regulation of weapons in houses of worship reveal the persistent problems plaguing religious liberty cases. First, these cases illustrate the difficulties non-mainstream religious claims face. Courts may not understand the religious nature of the claim or they may devalue claims that do not seem “normal” or “reasonable.” This is compounded by how few religious liberty claimants, especially non-mainstream religions, win their cases. Second, the cases are part of the larger debate about how easy it should be to get judicially imposed religious exemptions from general and neutral laws. …
Rethinking The “Religious-Question” Doctrine, Christopher C. Lund
Rethinking The “Religious-Question” Doctrine, Christopher C. Lund
Pepperdine Law Review
The “religious question” doctrine is a well-known and commonly accepted notion about the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses. The general idea is that, in our system of separated church and state, courts do not decide religious questions. And from this premise, many things flow — including the idea that courts must dismiss otherwise justiciable controversies when they would require courts to resolve religious questions. Yet a vexing thought arises. The religious-question doctrine traditionally comes out of a notion that secular courts cannot resolve metaphysical or theological issues. But when one looks at the cases that courts have been dismissing pursuant to …