Law Commons^™

The Supreme Court And Religious Liberty, Joseph D. Kearney

Marquette Law Review

None

The Free Exercise Of Religion, Arthur J. Goldberg

Akron Law Review

Freedom of speech and of the press, guaranteed by the First Amendment, is today regarded to be our most preferred freedom. Justice Cardozo once said this freedom is the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other freedom.

But, to the Founding Fathers, freedom of religion was regarded to be preeminent among fundamental rights. And for good reasons. The immediate forebearers of the Framers of the Constitution, emigrated primarily because they were denied the right freely to exercise their respective religious beliefs not sanctioned by the established Church of England. The Colonists were religious dissenters. They adamantly insisted upon their …

A Line Drawn By Unsteady Hands: Section 170, Charitable Contributions, And Return Benefits In Hernandez V. C.I.R., David M. Phipps

Akron Law Review

This Note analyzes the majority decision and dissenting opinion in Hernandez, which have far-reaching implications for charitable organizations, taxpayers, and the government. Traditional tax deductions for charitable organizations may be in danger and these organizations may suffer economic difficulty?

Of Flags And Menorahs: The Power Of Individual And Governmental Symbolic Speech, Mark F. Kohler

Akron Law Review

The aim of this article will be to explore the nature of symbolic speech, both individual and governmental. Using Johnson and Allegheny County as a backdrop, four themes will emerge from the article. First, both individuals and government speak and speak powerfully through symbols and symbolic conduct. Second, medium-based regulation of individual speech should receive careful judicial scrutiny. Third, unlike individual symbolic expression, governmental symbolic speech is subject to substantial content-based restrictions. Finally, careful distinctions must be drawn between government-initiated symbolic speech and governmental endorsement of individual symbolic speech.

God Talk By Professors Within The Classrooms Of Public Institutions Of Higher Education: What Is Constitutionally Permissible?, Sarah Howard Jenkins, Byron R. Johnson, Otto Jennings Helwig

Akron Law Review

This essay establishes, first, the professional aspects of disclosure. Second, it defines the equipoise between the State's interest in efficiency and the teacher's interest in exercising his or her First Amendment right of expression of religious opinion on matters of public interest. Third, the essay identifies expressive activities of the teacher within the classroom that should be accorded First Amendment protection pursuant to James v. Board of Education. Fourth, the essay examines whether the professor's disclosure of personal and theological biases in a classroom constitutes state action and concludes that a professor fulfilling his or her assigned tasks within …

Aclu V. Capitol Square Review And Advisory Board: Is There Salvation For The Establishment Clause? "With God All Things Are Possible.", Theologos Verginis

Akron Law Review

Part II of this Note provides a cursory review of the evolution of Establishment Clause jurisprudence, and it particularly focuses on the primary tests for analyzing the Establishment Clause that the Supreme Court has promoted over the years. Part III discusses the procedural history of the "Ohio State Motto" case with particular emphasis on the courts' decisions and their reasoning. Part IV analyzes the decision by the Court of Appeals for the Sixth District and addresses some of the concerns that inhere in the decision. Finally, Part V concludes the Note.

Kirsch V. Wisconsin Department Of Corrections: Will The Supreme Court Say "Hands Off" Again?, Owen J. Rarric

Akron Law Review

This Note examines the struggle of prison inmates to gain access to religious materials; materials that have been forbidden by prison officials. Part II of the Note will examine the historical development of inmates’ constitutional rights. It will also analyze the Supreme Court’s standard for reviewing prison regulations involving inmates’ constitutional rights. Moreover, the Note discusses Congress’ attempt to set the standard of review. The Note then examines the significance of the Kirsch decision. Finally, the Note analyzes the fourth factor of the Turner Standard used in Kirsch and explores the possible effect of a new legislative act on prisoners’ …

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 …

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 …

“Islamic Law” In Us Courts: Judicial Jihad Or Constitutional Imperative?, Faisal Kutty

Pepperdine Law Review

At the beginning of 2014, about a dozen states introduced or re-introduced bills to ban the use of Sharī’ah law. They hope to join the seven states that have ostensibly banned it to date. Anti-Sharī’ah advocates have cited a number of cases to back their tenuous claim that Sharī’ah is stealthily sneaking in through the doctrine of comity, but a close examination of the cases they cite contradicts their claim. Comity, when one court defers to the jurisdiction of another, has been accepted and denied based on legal principles and public policy, on a case-by-case basis. There is no creeping …

Foreign And Religious Family Law: Comity, Contract, And The Constitution, Ann Laquer Estin

Pepperdine Law Review

The article focuses on role of the U.S. courts in confronting religious laws in dispute resolution of various cases of domestic relations, contracts, and torts. Topics discussed include role of secular courts in maintaining constitutional balance between the free exercise and establishment clauses, constitutional challenges faced by religious adherents, and importance of legal pluralism in the U.S.

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 …

Response: Situating Ourselves In History, Steven D. Smith

Pepperdine Law Review

The author presents his views on history of religious freedom incorporated in his Brandeis lecture and in the book "The Rise and Decline of American Religious Freedom." Topics discussed include hegemonic status of special protection to religious freedom for legal academics, role of ending religious freedom in providing protection to religious actors under other constitutional provisions like free speech, and impact of ending religious freedom on other freedom like freedom of association.

The End Of Religious Freedom: What Is At Stake?, Nelson Tebbe

Pepperdine Law Review

In recent work, Steven Smith argues that the American tradition of religious freedom is newly imperiled and may even be nearing exhaustion. This Review puts to one side the substance of that argument and focuses instead on what the stakes might be, should it turn out to be correct. It concludes that the consequences would not be as severe as many people fear.

Theorists, Get Over Yourselves: A Response To Steven D. Smith, Andrew Koppelman

Pepperdine Law Review

In this article, the author presents his views in response to the article The Last Chapter? by critic of contemporary liberal theory Steven D. Smith in reference to his book "Defending American Religious Neutrality." Topics discussed include the political aspects associated with religious freedom, role of secularism in eroding religious freedom, and conflicts between religion and modern secular egalitarianism.

More “Vitiating Paradoxes”: A Response To Steven D. Smith, Paul Horwitz

Pepperdine Law Review

In this article, the author presents his views in response to the article The Last Chapter? by critic Steven D. Smith. Topics discussed include importance of critical legal studies (CLS) theory in reflecting political aspects of religious freedom, views of Smith in his book "The Rise and Decline of American Religious Freedom," and the relationship of egalitarianism with religious freedom.

The Last Chapter?, Steven D. Smith

Pepperdine Law Review

An essay is presented in which the author presents contrasting views of law professors at Stanford and Harvard University, Michael McConnell and Noah Feldman respectively on religious freedom. Topics discussed include requirement of special protection to religious freedom, protection of religious belief and expression under other constitutional provisions such as freedom of speech, and the failure of Obama Administration in providing special freedom of association to religious associations.

Installations Of Jewish Law In Public Urban Space: An American Eruv Controversy, Charlotte Elisheva Fonrobert

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This article analyzes the ongoing controversy over the installation of an eruv in Westhampton Beach. The author first provides an analytical description of the case with reference to other recent eruv controversies. Similar to arguments advanced in earlier eruv controversies, lawyers in the Westhampton case have taken recourse to the First Amendment, with proponents of the eruv relying on the free exercise clause, and opponents relying on the establishment clause. The article then proceeds to discuss the implications of this controversy for the larger issues of religion in the public sphere, as one of the critical issues emerging in all …

Ties That Bind? The Questionable Consent Justification For Hosanna-Tabor, Jessie Hill

Northwestern University Law Review

Arguments in favor of religious sovereignty often emphasize the benefits of autonomy for religious institutions while ignoring the civil rights of individuals who belong to or work for those institutions. To justify intrusions on individual civil rights, proponents of strong religious autonomy generally rely on the concept of implied consent. According to this rationale, individuals willingly give up the protection of civil rights laws when they voluntarily join religious organizations. This Essay responds to one scholar’s account of the consent rationale as undergirding the Supreme Court’s recognition of the ministerial exception: Christopher Lund’s excellent article, Free Exercise Reconceived: The Logic …

First Amendment Cases In The October 2004 Term, Joel M. Gora

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, Kings County, Wilson V. Kilkenny, James Dougherty

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bruce Ledewitz, American Religious Democracy: Coming To Terms With The End Of Secular Politics, Thomas A. Schweitzer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Once We Were Slaves, Now We Are Free: Legal, Administrative, And Social Issues Raised By Passover Celebrations In Prison, Aviva Orenstein

Pepperdine Law Review

“Once we were slaves, now we are free” is a central line from the Jewish Passover Seder, a ritual meal in which participants retell the story of liberation from Pharaoh’s oppression. In prison, many Jewish inmates request access to a Seder and to kosher-for-Passover food for the eight-day holiday. Prisoners’ requests to celebrate Passover provide a rich example for exploring the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act (RLUIPA), and raise a host of tough questions regarding cost, safety, equal treatment of prisoners, and establishment of religion. Because kosher-for-Passover meals are more expensive and generally of higher quality than regular …

Banning The Hijab In Prisons: Violations Of Incarcerated Muslim Women's Right To Free Exercise Of Religion, Ali Ammoura

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Muslim American women who wear the hijab, or Islamic headscarf, face religious discrimination in nearly every aspect of their public life. They even face it during arrest or incarceration. Law enforcement officials often force Muslim women to remove their hijab while in custody, which both degrades and humiliates them in the process. But prison policies that prohibit incarcerated Muslim women from wearing the hijab violate their right to free exercise of religion. Penal institutions should not prevent incarcerated Muslim women from wearing a hijab without compelling reasons, especially when such policies often arise out of religious discrimination. Courts must …

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 Constitutional Issues Surrounding The Science-Religion Conflict In Public Schools: The Anti-Evolution Controversy, Michael M. Greenburg

Pepperdine Law Review

Since the infamous Scopes trial the matter of the constitutional validity of the "anti-evolution" laws has plagued both legal scholars and school administrators. The courts have generally invalidated legislation which bans outright the teaching of evolution in public schools, but with the advent of the "balanced treatment" acts, a revival of this litigation has begun. The author examines the constitutional analysis utilized by the courts in dealing with the "anti-evolution" and "balanced treatment" acts and provides an historical perspective of the first amendment to question the Court's response to the issue.

Religion And First Amendment Prosecutions: An Analysis Of Justice Black's Constitutional Interpretation, Constance Mauney

Pepperdine Law Review

Justice Hugo L. Black served on the United States Supreme Court over a period of thirty-four years, encompassing Supreme Court terms from 1937 to 1971. During this period, the subject of the constitutional limitations of the freedom of religion was increasingly subjected to intense social pressures. Justice Black figured prominently in the development of constitutional law as the Supreme Court attempted to give meaning to the establishment and free exercise clause of the first amendment. He wrote the majority opinions which dealt with the establishment clause in the Everson, McCulloin, Engel and Torcaso cases. Yet, on later occasions, Justice Black …

Marsh V. Chambers: The Supreme Court Takes A New Look At The Establishment Clause, Diane L. Walker

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Observations On The Establishment Clause, William French Smith

Pepperdine Law Review

As evidenced by current interpretations of the establishment clause, lower federal court decisions indicate an increased tendency of hostility toward religion. In this article, Attorney General William French Smith surveys the history of the establishment clause and Supreme Court decisions regarding religious issues. Attorney General Smith then notes the recent success of the Reagan Administration's efforts, through amicus curiae briefs, to advocate an interpretation of the establishment clause which permits the states to take an attitude of benevolent neutrality toward religion. The article then concludes that such a position is both historically and judicially sound.