Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

The Blaine Amendment Of 1876: Harbinger Of Secularism?, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

The Blaine Amendment of 1876 was a Congressional effort to add a sixteenth amendment to the Constitution. The leading feature and central aspiration of the proposal was to prohibit the states from giving financial aid to schools run by sects. Passed overwhelmingly by the House of Representatives, the Blaine Amendment narrowly failed to secure the necessary two-thirds vote in the Senate.

This paper examines the Blaine Amendment as a political phenomenon; that is, as a Republican attempt to exploit anti-Catholic prejudice in a presidential election year. It also looks at the Blaine Amendment constitutionally; that is, for the light it …

The Prodigal Argument: Mccollum V. Board Of Education, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

From the Introduction

Judges, lawyers, and scholars all cite the 1947 case, Everson v. Board of Education, as the cornerstone of Establishment Clause doctrine. They are right to do so. The Everson Court took two path-breaking steps: incorporation and strict separation. The justices there held, for the first time, that the Fourteenth Amendment made the Establishment Clause applicable to state action. Then they offered a novel account of what non-establishment meant. In sweeping language (which you can find at 330 U.S. 15 - 16) they held that it meant more than equality among religions. By requiring that all government …

Petition For Writ Of Certiorari, Richard W. Garnett, Michael Stokes Paulsen, David C. Gibbs Jr., David C. Gibbs Iii, Charlotte A. Cover, Barbara J. Weller

Court Briefs

No. 00-131
K.D.M. v. Reedsport School District

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

From the Reasons for Granting the Writ

The Ninth Circuit conceded that the regulation at issue below " 'discriminates' against students in religious schools, i.e., treats them differently by denying them state services on the school grounds." KDM, 196 F.2d 1046, 1051 (9th Cir. 1999) (App. B at 11 a). This, then, is a case about admitted discrimination - discrimination against "religious ideas, religious people, [and] religious schools." Board of Educ. of Kiryas Joel v. …

Brief Amicus Curiae, Urging Reversal, On Behalf Of - John J. Russell, Bishop Of Richmond; Lawrence Cardinal Shehan, Archbishop Of Baltimore; Paul A. Hallinan, Archbishop Of Atlanta; Philip M. Hannan, Archbishop Of New Orleans; Robert E. Lucey, Archbishop Of San Antonio; Joseph B. Brunini, Apostolic Administrator Of Natchez-Jackson; Lawrence M. Defalco, Bishop Of Amarillo; Joseph A. Dirick, Apostolic Administrator Of Nashville; Thomas K. Gorman, Bishop Of Dallas-Ft. Worth; Joseph H. Hodges, Bishop Of Wheeling; John L. Morkovsky, Apostolic Administrator Of Galveston-Houston; Victor J. Reed, Bishop Of Oklahoma City And Tulsa; L. J. Reicher, Bishop Of Austin; Thomas Tschoepe, Bishop Of San Angelo; Ernest L. Unterkoefler, Bishop Of Charleston; Vincent S. Waters, Bishop Of Raleigh; The National Catholic Conference For Interracial Justice; And The National Catholic Social Action Conference, William M. Lewers C.S.C, William B. Ball

Court Briefs

No. 395
Richard Perry Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia

On Appeal from the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia

From the Summary Statement of the Case

Appellants, Richard Perry Loving and Mildred Jeter Loving, were convicted on January 6, 1959, in the Circuit Court of Caroline County, Virginia, under an indictment charging that "the said Richard Perry Loving being a White person and the said Mildred Delores Jeter [Loving] being a Colored person, did unlawfully and feloniously go out of the State of Virginia, for the purpose of being married and with the intention of returning to the State of …

Due Process And Social Legislation In The Supreme Court--A Post Mortem, Robert E. Rodes

Journal Articles

Nowadays, there is no more discredited era in our judicial history than that represented by such cases as Lochner v. New York.' During this era, we are told, our ancestors were so benighted economically as to embrace economic principles incapable of producing the good life, and so benighted judicially as to read their economics into the Constitution. We have barely left behind us the bulk of the advocates and judges whose role in history it was to slay the giant laissez-faire, so it is not surprising that we should have no picture of their adversary but the dne that was …