Sentences with phrase «free exercise clause»

Our first instinct in the legal battles spawned by the progressive excesses of the last few years is to reach for the free exercise clause, which after all exists to protect religious people's ability to live out their faiths in practice.

The free exercise clause offers a defense of religious freedom rooted in a defense of individual conscience and in turn in the broader liberal logic of individual rights.

That liberalism is not an actual religion means the establishment clause will not generally avail contemporary traditionalists as a legal tool; arguments in court must continue to make the most of the free exercise clause, which offers us vital protections.

The case law arising out of the free exercise clause has long involved broadening such narrow definitions, which has resulted in requirements for accommodations of various sorts for religious people in the public square.

The free exercise clause protects any organization oriented around a theological worldview.

Finally, secular individualism can defend legislative, but not judicial, free exercise exemptions only by draining the free exercise clause of substantive content and effect.

The free exercise clause of the First Amendment poses no obstacle to a judge with any creativity, and» given the demonstrated animus of the current judicial regime against believers» a showdown between church and state may be inevitable.

Mandatory reporting laws forcing the disclosure of confidential penitential information must be seen as a violation of the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

They are about the establishment and free exercise clauses — period.

«It does not take a clear position on the reach of the free exercise clause.»

If the Church refused to marry them because they did not meet its criteria for a sacramental wedding» if both parties were of the same sex, for example» the state could do nothing about it, since the Church is a voluntary association protected by the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

In Zorach v. Clausen the remark that «We are a religious people» might be seen as gratuitous — this is the only case here involving the establishment rather than the free exercise clause — except that what is allowed by the Court is a religions program.

In Gilardi, taking a quasi-Originalist perspective, the court noted that the free exercise clause implicitly included groups and organizations; not just individuals.

Preparations are already underway to make the case before the Supreme Court that state Blaine Amendments violate the equal protection clause and the free exercise clause of the Bill of Rights.

Wednesday's decision reversed a lower court ruling, and revived claims by Texas - based groups and individuals, including the McAllen Grace Brethren Church, that the regulation violated their rights under the First Amendment's free exercise clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Likewise, the free exercise clause — along with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and related federal legislation — speaks to such issues as whether and how public schools can teach students about religion, and how school districts can appropriately provide educational options for religious students (such as through vouchers to attend separate programs or accommodations to tailor typical offerings to their needs).

So, to learn more about Gorsuch's jurisprudence and see how it might connect to education, I read roughly two dozen of the major cases in which he has ruled, which yielded several key dispositions that likely would accompany him to Washington, D.C. I found Gorsuch's work to be sensible, law - bound, and quite readable, whether he is addressing high - toned issues such as the First Amendment's free exercise clause or more mundane subjects as student burping.

Regarding religious issues, Gorsuch tends to view the scope of the establishment clause narrowly and the free exercise clause broadly.

Like other textualists, Gorsuch tends to view the scope of the establishment clause («Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion») fairly narrowly, and the free exercise clause («or prohibiting the free exercise thereof») fairly broadly.

Choice supporters claim that such discriminatory exclusion violates the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause and the First Amendment's free exercise clause.

In Trinity, justices ruled 7 - 2 that Missouri's policy violated the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, because Missouri could not discriminate in state funding «based on religious identity with respect to playground resurfacing.»

In a concurring opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch contended that this distinction is unsustainable and, at any rate, should not matter under the free exercise clause: Religious people must be able to act on their beliefs; that's what «exercise» means.

The equal protection and free exercise clauses, as suggested above, generally prohibit laws that discriminate on the basis of religion or that discriminate against a particular religion.

This means that excluding religious schools may violate not one but three separate constitutional provisions: the equal protection clause, the free exercise clause (which protects the free exercise of religion), and the free speech clause.

The equal protection clause and the free exercise clause both prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion unless there is some compelling reason for the discrimination.

According to a fairly controversial Supreme Court decision about a decade ago, the free exercise clause does not prohibit a state from applying religiously neutral and generally applicable laws to religious institutions or individuals.

Although some strange quirks exist within this rule, it seems safe to conclude that the free exercise clause would not entitle private religious schools to an exemption from generally applicable antidiscrimination or academic regulations.

Voucher schools can be expected to rely on at least three federal constitutional rights in an effort to block regulation: the free exercise clause, the First Amendment right to association, and the free speech clause.

In an article in the new issue of Education Next, Joshua Dunn examines the Colorado ruling and explains that because the Blaine Amendment comes from a time of widespread anti-Catholic prejudice, the U.S. Supreme Court could very well strike down the ruling on the grounds that the Blaine Amendment violates the free exercise clause.

Many conservatives in the United States are strong supporters of the free exercise clause, but think that the establishment clause should only apply to the federal government (so the state and local governments can establish a religion).

The «free exercise clause» is similar to the stance that the Koran takes towards «People of the Book» but applied to any kind of religious belief not just Jews and Christians.

One part is the «free exercise clause» which allows people to practice the religion of their choice.