Religion Law Commons^™

Clergy Malpractice: Making Clergy Accountable To A Lower Power, Lawrence M. Burek

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Municipal And State Sanctuary Declarations: Innocuous Symbolism Or Improper Dictates?, Jorge L. Carro

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Avoiding Religious Apartheid: Affording Equal Treatment For Student-Initiated Religious Expression In Public Schools , John W. Whitehead

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Theism, Naturalism, And Liberalism: John Stuart Mill And The “Final Inexplicability” Of The Self, John Lawrence Hill

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

To Teach And Persuade, Sherman J. Clark

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Saving The First Amendment From Itself: Relief From The Sherman Act Against The Rabbinic Cartels, Barak D. Richman

Pepperdine Law Review

America’s rabbis currently structure their employment market with rules that flagrantly violate the Sherman Act. The consequences of these rules, in addition to the predictable economic outcomes of inflated wages for rabbis and restricted consumer freedoms for the congregations that employ them, meaningfully hinder Jewish communities from seeking their preferred spiritual leader. Although the First Amendment cannot combat against this privately-orchestrated (yet paradigmatic) restriction on religious expression, the Sherman Act can. Ironically, however, the rabbinic organizations implementing the restrictive policies claim that the First Amendment immunizes them from Sherman Act scrutiny, thereby claiming the First Amendment empowers them to do …

Blame It On Catholic Bishop: The Question Of Nlrb Jurisdiction Over Religious Colleges And Universities, Susan J. Stabile

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Seeking An Islamic Reflective Equilibrium: A Response To Abdullahi A. An-Na'im’S Complementary, Not Competing, Claims Of Law And Religion: An Islamic Perspective, Mohammad H. Fadel

Pepperdine Law Review

Professor 'Abdallahi Na'im argues that there can be no conflict between religion and the state because religion and politics are part of different normative orders, and thus it is not conceivable that a conflict can arise between them. I argue that Na'im's solution to the problematic relationship of religion to state shares the same conceptual terrain as separationism in American constitutional law, a position which has grown increasingly untenable as a result of the increasing religious pluralism in the United States and the expansion of the government into areas of life in a manner that would have been inconceivable even …

The Endorsement Test Is Alive And Well: A Cause For Celebration And Sorrow, Mark Strasser

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Complementary, Not Competing, Claims Of Law And Religion: An Islamic Perspective, Abdullahi A. An-Na'im

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Priority Of Law: A Response To Michael Stokes Paulsen, Eugene Volokh

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Neutrality And The Good Of Religious Freedom: An Appreciative Response To Professor Koppelman, Richard W. Garnett

Pepperdine Law Review

This paper is a short response to an address, “And I Don’t Care What It Is: Religious Neutrality in American Law,” delivered by Prof. Andrew Koppelman at a conference, “The Competing Claims of Law and Religion: Who Should Influence Whom?”, which was held at Pepperdine University in February of 2012. In this response, it is suggested – among other things – that “American religious neutrality” is, as Koppelman argues, “coherent and attractive” because and to the extent that it is not neutral with respect to the goal and good of religious freedom. Religious freedom, in the American tradition, is not …

The Priority Of God: A Theory Of Religious Liberty, Michael Stokes Paulsen

Pepperdine Law Review

Professor Paulsen argues that religious freedom only makes entire sense as a constitutional arrangement on the premise that God exists, that God makes actual demands on human loyalty and conduct, and that those demands precede and are superior in obligation to those of the State. Religious freedom exists to protect the exercise of plausibly true understandings of God's actual commands, as against state power, and to disable state power to proscribe -- or prescribe -- religious exercise. The article explores four possible stances of society toward religious freedom, depending on whether society and state embrace the idea of religious truth …

Can We Please Stop Talking About Neutrality? Koppelman Between Scalia And Rawls, Chad Flanders

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Mighty Work Of Making Nations Happy: A Response To James Davison Hunter, Patrick Mckinley Brennan

Pepperdine Law Review

This article is an invited response to James Davison Hunter’s much-discussed book To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World (Oxford University Press, 2010). Hunter, a sociologist at UVA and a believing Protestant, claims that law’s capacity to contribute to social change is “mostly illusory” and that Christians, therefore, should practice “faithful presence” in the public square rather than seek to influence law directly. My response is that it is, in fact, law’s stunning ability to alter and limit available choices that makes it an object of deservedly fierce contest. The wild …

And I Don’T Care What It Is: Religious Neutrality In American Law, Andrew Koppelman

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Faithful Presence And Theological Jurisprudence: A Response To James Davison Hunter , Zachary R. Calo

Pepperdine Law Review

This paper considers how James Hunter’s arguments, presented both in his address and his book To Change the World, might inform the development of a constructive religious legal theory based in the particular resources of Christian theology. In speaking of religious legal theory, I mean something quite different than a theory of law and religion. For some time, the academic conversation about law and religion has centered around issues concerning church-state relations and, more broadly, the place of religion within the liberal political order. Yet, the regnant methodological concerns that have shaped this discourse reflect the boundedness of law to …

Symposium Introduction: The Competing Claims Of Law And Religion: Who Should Influence Whom? , Robert F. Cochran Jr., Michael A. Helfand

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law, Religion, And The Common Good, James Davison Hunter

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Just Another Brick In The Wall: The Establishment Clause As A Heckler's Veto, Richard F. Duncan

Nebraska College of Law: Faculty Publications

"When rights are incorporated against the States through the Fourteenth Amendment they should advance, not constrain, individual liberty."'

Although the First Amendment explicitly protects individuals against only laws made by "Congress," the Supreme Court has long held that, under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the states are forbidden from "depriving" persons of the fundamental individual liberties protected by the First Amendment.' Thus, under the so-called doctrine of incorporation, a particular provision of the First Amendment (as well as of the rest of the Bill of Rights) "is made applicable to the states [only] if the Justices are …