Example Image
Civitas Outlook
Topic
Constitutionalism
Published on
Dec 16, 2024
Contributors
Vincent Phillip Muñoz

What is an Establishment of Religion? And What Does Disestablishment Require?

Contributors
Vincent Phillip Muñoz
Vincent Phillip Muñoz
Non-Resident Senior Fellow
Summary
Vincent Phillip Muñoz reviews Agreeing to Disagree: How the Establishment Clause Protects Religious Diversity and Freedom of Conscience by Nathan S. Chapman and Michael W. McConnell.
Summary
Vincent Phillip Muñoz reviews Agreeing to Disagree: How the Establishment Clause Protects Religious Diversity and Freedom of Conscience by Nathan S. Chapman and Michael W. McConnell.

Strange as it may seem, as of this writing (Summer of 2023), it is not exactly clear what the Establishment Clause prohibits. In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022), the Supreme Court announced that the “Lemon” and “endorsement” tests had been “abandoned,” meaning, presumably, that the federal judiciary should no longer utilize these “wall of separation” doctrines.[2] But it did not clarify the rule or test judges should use in future Establishment Clause cases. Instead, the Court resolved the question of whether a public school’s football coach could pray on the field after games using the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses.[3]

Given the unsettled state of Establishment Clause jurisprudence, Nathan Chapman and Michael McConnell’s new book, Agreeing to Disagree: How the Establishment Clause Protects Religious Diversity and Freedom of Conscience, is especially well-timed. And its argument is especially well-suited to the current moment. Agreeing to Disagree explores the Establishment Clause’s meaning in light of history and tradition, the current Supreme Court majority’s preferred mode of engagement.[4] In their own way, moreover, Chapman and McConnell appeal to diversity and inclusion—two of the reigning ideals of elite opinion. The book’s breadth, levelheadedness, and accessibility is commendable, and the prominence of its authors—Chapman is the Pope F. Brock Associate Professor of Professional Responsibility at the University of Georgia School of Law and McConnell is the Richard and Frances Mallery Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School and perhaps the nation’s most distinguished church-state legal scholar—ensure the book’s influence. Some originalists, however, will have reservations about the book’s methodology, and some of the authors’ historical claims extend beyond the available evidence. Nonetheless, Agreeing to Disagree is likely to become a particularly important guide as the Court develops its next phase of Establishment Clause jurisprudence.

Read Full Paper at Constitutional Commentary

This paper was originally published by the University of Minnesota Law School's Constitutional Commentary journal.

Continue Reading & Download PDF
Loading the Elevenlabs Text to Speech AudioNative Player...
More articles

Trump Must Pick Judges Who Have Publicly Demonstrated Their Courage

Constitutionalism
Jan 23, 2025

Sorry, Biden's Pardons Are Much Worse Than Trump's

Politics
Jan 22, 2025
View all

Join the newsletter

Receive new publications, news, and updates from the Civitas Institute.

Sign up
More on

Constitutionalism

No items found.
No items found.
Causes Tending to Undermine a Democratic Republic

Commentary on de Tocqueville: Vol. One, Part Two, Chapter Nine

Richard Epstein
Multiple Contributors
Constitutionalism
Jan 22, 2025
Natural Law vs. Positivism, Chapter 8

In which John Yoo goes full Holmes, ignoring the sound advice "Never go full Holmes..."

John Yoo
Multiple Contributors
Constitutionalism
Dec 29, 2024

Keeping the Republic: A Constitution Day Lecture with Marc Landy

Constitutionalism
1:05
No items found.
No items found.
Trump Must Pick Judges Who Have Publicly Demonstrated Their Courage

The two most conservative members of the Court, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, routinely complain that their new colleagues lack fortitude.

Josh Blackman
Multiple Contributors
Constitutionalism
Jan 23, 2025
Fake Convictions and Fake Pardons

Are preemptive pardons permissible to cover cases for offenses that may have not been committed and for which no charges may ever be brought?

Richard Epstein
Multiple Contributors
Constitutionalism
Jan 14, 2025
Degraded Deliberation in the U.S. House

Congressional Republicans are setting themselves up for explosive failures on the floor.

Philip Wallach
Multiple Contributors
Constitutionalism
Jan 7, 2025
Deconstructing the Administrative State: Will This Time be Different?

Our political system is designed so that durable and significant policy change is only achievable through congressional action.

Joseph Postell
Multiple Contributors
Constitutionalism
Jan 3, 2025
No items found.