Comments on: Catholics and Religious Liberty

By: pauld

pauld — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 19:30:01 +0000

“Democratic-appointed judges were predicted to uphold Establishment Clause challenges at a 57.3 percent rate, while the predicted probability of success fell to 25.4 percent before Republican-appointed judges.”

Let us keep in mind that the “establishment” clause is different from the “free-exercise” clause. Among other things, the “Establishment” clause is used to strike down religious displays (e.g. nativity scenes, posting of ten commandments) and government efforts to aid religious instutitions (e.g. government support of parochial schools). It is the “free exercise” clause that is implicated by the contraceptive mandate.

That being said, there are certainly many conservative jurists and scholars who take a narrow view of the “free-exercise” clause based upon “originalists” constitutional jurisprudence. Two prominent Catholics who come to mind are Justice Scalia on the Supreme Court and Professor Gerard Bradley, a professor at Notre Dame’s law school. Justice Scalia wrote the majority opinion in Employment Division v. Smith case, which created a furor by adopting a narrow interpretation of the free exersice clause. Professor Bradley, is a strong opponent of the contraceptive mandate, but agrees generally with Scalia’s views on the “free exercise” clause and doubts that the mandate can be properly struck down on constitutional grounds.

By: PowerLinks – 08.02.12 | @ActonInstitute PowerBlog

PowerLinks – 08.02.12 | @ActonInstitute PowerBlog — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 16:12:59 +0000

[...] question we hear a lot is “isn’t the accumulation of wealth wrong?” In a word, no.Catholics and Religious Liberty R.R. Reno, First ThingsThe ever useful Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has released a new [...]

By: Blake

Blake — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 15:13:13 +0000

Concerns about religious liberty have become a partisan issue.

This isn’t surprising, given that one political party – and only one – is now claiming that some ideas (beliefs, thoughts) are so important that there is no right to question them.

There is only one acceptable way to believe about birth control, abortion, gay marriage, etc. and this is more important than any outdated old Constitution.

By: Mere Links 08.02.12 - Mere Comments

Mere Links 08.02.12 - Mere Comments — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 15:01:02 +0000

[...] Catholics and Religious Liberty R.R. Reno, First Things The ever useful Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has released a new survey. The focus falls on attitudes toward the recent push by the Catholic Bishops to highlight the threats posed to religious liberty. [...]

By: Gail Finke

Gail Finke — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 14:36:25 +0000

I am also concerned about the Republican party becoming the de facto “religious” party. But what can one do? Like many people brought up as Democrats, I have had to leave the party as it progressively became both aggressively secular and downright hostile to religion. I tried to be a “Democrat for Life” and all the rest, but the leadership of the party has no sympathy with these subgroups and people, all of which/whom have abandoned their principles. Remember Casey Jr’s disgraceful speech at the DNC, at which it became clear that the Democrats would allow members to hold pro-life viewpoints but not to do anything about them? The parties have shifted before, and it looks as if this is going to be an enduring shift we will just have to deal with.

By: JD

JD — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 21:17:12 +0000

Fascinating numbers. If I may I’d like to throw in my two cents on the religious liberty issue, which is at http://traditium.com/2012/07/18/on-religious-freedom/. Perhaps a few more folks can be persuaded as to the importance of this issue.

By: Michael PS

Michael PS — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:11:42 +0000

This suggests that appointments to the federal judiciary and to SCOTUS may well prove the most enduring part of a president’s legacy.

By: David Nickol

David Nickol — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:53:34 +0000

Greg Sisk on Mirror of Justice said the following in a comment recently:

In our Michigan Law Review article, Ideology “All the Way Down”? An Empirical Study of Establishment Clause Decisions in the Federal Courts, we found that, holding other variables constant, Democratic-appointed judges were predicted to uphold Establishment Clause challenges at a 57.3 percent rate, while the predicted probability of success fell to 25.4 percent before Republican-appointed judges. Thus, an Establishment Clause claimant’s chances for success were 2.25 times higher before a judge appointed by a Democratic President than one appointed by a Republican President.

The paper mentioned, although rather far above my head (especially when it came to statistical analysis), was fascinating, and my feeling was that at last we had some actual empirical evidence on the differences between Republicans and Democrats on religious liberty issues.