Law Commons^™

Quiet Encroachments On School Prayer Jurisprudence, Amanda Harmony Cooley

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Who Let The Ghouls Out? The History And Tradition Test’S Embrace Of Neutrality And Pluralism In Establishment Cases, Jake S. Neill

Pepperdine Law Review

In June of 2022, the Supreme Court decided in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District that an Establishment Clause inquiry “focused on original meaning and history” would replace Lemon’s endorsement test. But after announcing the test, the Court neglected to describe or apply it. This Comment attempts to fill that void. After analyzing the Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence, this Comment proposes tenets of the history and tradition test and applies those tenets to Allegheny County v. ACLU, a case decided under Lemon. Finally, this Comment concludes by arguing that the history and tradition inquiry supports pluralism, humility, tolerance, and a healthy …

Where To Place The “Nones” In The Church And State Debate? Empirical Evidence From Establishment Clause Cases In Federal Court, Gregory C. Sisk, Michael Heise

St. John's Law Review

In this third iteration of our ongoing empirical examination of religious liberty decisions in the lower federal courts, we studied all digested Establishment Clause decisions by federal circuit and district court judges from 2006 through 2015. The first clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution directs that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” That provision has generated decades of controversy regarding the appropriate role of religion in public life.

Holding key variables constant, we found that Catholic judges approved Establishment Clause claims at a 29.6% rate, compared with a 41.5% rate before non-Catholic …

Establishing An End To Lemon In The Eleventh Circuit, Amanda Harmon Cooley

University of Miami Law Review

Over half a century ago, the Supreme Court decided Lemon v. Kurtzman, the most controversial Establishment Clause case in judicial history. And despite the Lemon test’s constant criticism, the Court has never expressly overruled the decision in its entirety. This continues to be the case even after Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, in which the Court noted Lemon’s abandonment rather than its complete abrogation. As a result, lower federal district courts have been left in limbo regarding whether Lemon is fair game for any of their Establishment Clause determinations and have been inconsistent in using it as …

Protecting Islam's Garden From The Wilderness: Halal Fraud Statutes And The First Amendment, Elijah L. Milne

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Like all religions, Islam needs protection from governmental encroachment. As early as 1644, Roger Williams, the founder of Rhode Island, recognized that state involvement in religious matters defiles religion. "When they have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of [religion] and the wilderness of the world," wrote Williams, "God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the candlestick, and made His garden a wilderness ... ." Although Williams was mostly concerned about the government's impact on Christianity, his oft-quoted metaphor applies equally to the government's influence on Islam. This Article will discuss …

School Board Prayer: Reconciling The Legislative Prayer Exception And School Prayer Jurisprudence, Evan Lee

Akron Law Review

The Supreme Court has carved a legislative prayer exception out of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause to allow clergy to deliver opening prayers at legislative sessions and meetings of local public deliberative bodies, such as town boards. Meanwhile, for decades, the Supreme Court has struck drown prayers in the public school context, including prayers in the classroom, at graduation ceremonies, and at high school varsity football games. However, the Supreme Court has not addressed whether prayers at public school board meetings should be barred as prayers in the public school context or permitted under the legislative prayer exception. A circuit …

Let’S Go To The Beach: Gender Segregation As A Tool To Accommodate Religious Minorities, Sarah Gibbons

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

My Body Is Note My Choice Anymore? How Conscience Protections For Doctors Violate An Individual’S Right To Use Contraceptives And The Establishment Clause, Wanying Yang

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Introduction

After a month of waiting, Evann finally met her gynecologist for a consultation on her first intrauterine device (IUD). However, before Evann told the gynecologist her request and symptoms, the gynecologist emphasized she was in a Catholic hospital and that they only prescribe oral contraceptives to patients with heavy cramping. The gynecologist then passed Evann an unofficial paper with an IUD provider’s number and expressed sorrow regarding Evann’s decision to use contraceptives. Evann walked out of the hospital without any information on the IUD, but instead with frustration and shame.

Dehors The Record: A Correction Of A Final Jeopardy Question, Thomas E. Baker

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

First Amendment “Harms”, Stephanie H. Barclay

Indiana Law Journal

What role should harm to third parties play in the government’s ability to protect religious rights? The intuitively appealing “harm” principle has animated new theories advanced by scholars who argue that religious exemptions are indefensible whenever they result in cognizable harm to third parties. This third-party harm theory is gaining traction in some circles, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s pending cases in Little Sisters of the Poor and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. While focusing on harm appears at first to provide an appealing, simple, and neutral principle for avoiding other difficult moral questions, the definition of harm …

Government Speech Doctrine—Legislator-Led Prayer's Saving Grace, Daniel M. Vitagliano

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note argues that Lund was decided incorrectly in part because the Fourth Circuit failed to analyze the type of speech at issue before assessing the constitutionality of the prayer practice. This Note is composed of four parts. Part I surveys the Supreme Court’s legislative prayer jurisprudence—Marsh and Town of Greece. Part II outlines Lund and Bormuth, and the Fourth and Sixth Circuits’ dissimilar applications of the Supreme Court’s precedent. Part III argues that courts must first classify legislative prayers as either government or private speech before assessing whether a prayer practice violates the Establishment Clause. It further argues …

How Conscientious Objectors Killed The Draft: The Collapse Of The Selective Service During The Vietnam War, Bill Raley

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article argues that a key-but-overlooked factor in the Vietnam-era breakdown of the draft system was the Supreme Court’s expansion of the religious conscientious objector ("CO") exemption. It asserts that the Court understood that the CO exemption violated the Establishment Clause, but rather than strike the exemption down, the Court avoided the constitutional issue by interpreting away the religious element of CO statutes. The Article concludes that the Court’s rulings caused CO exemptions to skyrocket, which in turn caused the draft system to collapse toward the end of the Vietnam War.

American Legion V. American Humanist Ass'n: Exempting Longstanding Governmental Religious Displays From Establishment Clause Scrutiny And How The Endorsement Test Could Have Prevented It, M. Allison Hyde

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Where Does It Fit? Solving The School Board Prayer Puzzle, Austin Reed

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

American Legion V. American Humanist Association, Seth T. Bonilla

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The separation of church and state is a key element of American democracy, but its interpretation has been challenged as the country grows more diverse. In American Legion v. American Humanist Association, the Supreme Court adopted a new standard to analyze whether a religious symbol on public land maintained by public funding violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause.

God Save The United States And This Honorable County Board Of Commissioners: Lund, Bormuth, And The Fight Over Legislative Prayer, Mary Nobles Hancock

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Note addresses whether, and to what extent, the four factors proposed by the Fourth Circuit, and subsequently rejected by the Sixth Circuit, are an appropriate test of the constitutionality of a legislative prayer practice under United States Supreme Court jurisprudence. Part II explores the background of the Establishment Clause and legislative prayer. The Supreme Court has placed significant emphasis on the history of legislative prayer in evaluating modern prayer practices, as seen in its two cases Marsh v. Chambers and Town of Greece v. Galloway. Part III examines the first two circuit court decisions to consider challenges to local …

Christian Legislative Prayers And Christian Nationalism, Caroline Mala Corbin

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Response to Mary Nobles Hancock's Note explains Christian nationalism, and argues that government sponsored Christian prayers reflect and exacerbate Christian nationalism. It further contends that to help curb Christian nationalism and its ill effects, legislative prayers ought to cease entirely. Such a result is most in keeping with the Establishment Clause goal of avoiding a caste system based on religious belief.

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

Washington and Lee Law Review

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.

Reflections On The Church/State Puzzle, Kermit V. Lipez

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Devotion ̶T̶O̶ And The Rule Of Law: Acknowledging The Role Of Religious Values In Judicial Decision-Making, Priya Purohit

Indiana Law Journal

This Comment advocates for the acknowledgment of religious values in judicial decision-making in three parts. Part I explores the role of religion in American politics, and more specifically, the role of religion in federal judicial confirmation hearings and state-level judicial elections. Membership to an institutionalized religion often performs an essential gatekeeping function when it comes to assessing the background or personal values of a candidate for political or judicial office. The initially positive role of religion in judicial selection processes suggests that the practice of refusing to acknowledge the role that religion likely already plays in judicial decision-making is wholly …

Stretching The First Amendment: Religious Freedom And Its Constitutional Limits Within The Adoption Sector, Tracy Smith

Pepperdine Law Review

The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity.

Brennan And Brewbaker's Christian Legal Thought: Providing The Foundations For Establishment Clause Understanding, Angela C. Carmella

Journal of Catholic Legal Studies

(Excerpt)

Under this approach—which clearly prioritizes the protection of religious exercise as well as the religious messages of cultural and political institutions—it appears that the Establishment Clause plays little or no role independent of the Free Exercise Clause. My question, then, is whether Christian legal thought compels us, or at least supports, such a reading of the Establishment Clause. In other words, does this lack of concern for non-establishment norms inhere in Christian legal and political thought? I look to Patrick Brennan and William Brewbaker’s casebook—Christian Legal Thought: Materials and Cases (“CLT”) —in search of a framework for exploration. …

Tipped Scales: A Look At The Ever-Growing Imbalance Of Power Protecting Religiously Motivated Conduct, Why That's Bad, And How To Stop It, Jeff Nelson

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note examines the current state of the law that seemingly allows individuals to harm and discriminate against others on the basis of their protected religious beliefs. This Note also explores how such a result has been made possible and how it may be stymied by judicial and legislative action. Section II discusses a short history of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause leading up to Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, and also includes an examination of both the real and possible harmful effects of RFRAs, current reactions to the application of these laws domestically, and interesting parallels internationally. Section III …

Is There Any Silver Lining To Trinity Lutheran Church, Inc. V. Comer?, Caroline Mala Corbin

Michigan Law Review Online

Trinity Lutheran Church, Inc. v. Comer is a significant setback for a strong separation of church and state. Missouri denied a playground grant to Trinity Lutheran because of a state constitutional provision that bans financial aid to churches. The church sued. The Supreme Court held not only that the Establishment Clause allowed the government to give taxpayer money to Trinity Lutheran, but that the Free Exercise Clause required it. The decision's many flaws are not the focus of this short Essay. Instead, this Essay dissects the Supreme Court's reasoning in order to apply it to current controversies in related areas …

Religion Lessons From Europe: Intolerant Secularism, Pluralistic Neutrality, And The U.S. Supreme Court, Antony Barone Kolenc

Pace International Law Review

Case law from the European Court of Human Rights demonstrates to the U.S. Supreme Court how a pluralistic neutrality principle can enrich the American society and harness the value of faith in the public sphere, while at the same time retaining the vigorous protection of individual religious rights. The unfortunate alternative to a jurisprudence built around pluralistic neutrality is the inevitability of intolerant secularism—an increasingly militant separation of religious ideals from the public life, leading ultimately to a repressive society that has no room in its government for religious citizens. The results of intolerant secularism are seen in a recent …

Putting Faith In Europe: Should The U.S. Supreme Court Learn From The European Court Of Human Rights?, Antony Barone Kolenc

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Lautsi Decision And The American Establishment Clause Experience: A Response To Professor Weiler, William P. Marshall

Maine Law Review

In Lautsi v. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights (“ECHR”) held that an Italian law requiring crucifixes to be displayed in public school classrooms did not violate the European Convention on Human Rights (“European Convention”). In so holding, the ECHR sent the message that it would not incorporate American nonestablishment norms into its interpretation of the European Convention. They key advocate behind the Lautsi decision was Professor Joseph Weiler. Representing the nations intervening in the case on behalf of Italy, Professor Weiler took the lead in arguing against a strict nonestablishment interpretation of the European Convention—the position that the …

The Wholesale Exclusion Of Religion From Public Benefits Programs: Why The First Amendment Religion Clauses Must Take A Backseat To Equal Protection, Michael J. Borger

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law: If These Walls Could Talk: Giving Undue Deference To Religious Actors By Expanding The Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine—Pfeil V. St. Matthews Evangelical Lutheran Church Of Unaltered Augsburg Confession, Jeremy D.F. Krahn

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Religious Freedom Waltz: Going Forward While Moving Back, Audra L. Savage

ConLawNOW

Although religious freedom has the distinction as the “first freedom,” it is not first in terms of protected rights. Religious freedom is under attack and if not shielded from potential threats, this quintessential American right may be lost altogether. Or at least, this is what U.S. law professors Andrew Koppelman and Steven D. Smith would have one believe, according to books each professor recently published. Unfortunately, they are not exaggerating. Volumes of articles and tomes have been written questioning, critiquing and criticizing (and lamenting, blasting and ridiculing) the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court adjudicating the religion clauses of the …