This month, I have had the pleasure of teaching an online seminar on the Supreme Court of the United States for students in Yerevan State University’s Master’s Program in American Studies. The seminar focuses on the Court’s power of judicial review and the limits on that power—limits imposed by the other branches of government, by the Court itself, and by the American people. We also have been discussing current proposals for Supreme Court reform. I have used the Court’s Religion Clause jurisprudence as an example of its influence in US life.
The seminar has been a lot of fun. The students have asked excellent questions about constitutional law, judicial power, and the Court’s role in American public life. I am grateful to Yerevan State University, the Master’s Program in American Studies, Alexander Markarov, and Vahagn Aglyan for the invitation and for their hospitality.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web
The Fourth Circuit ruled that Virginia may deny state scholarship funding for students pursuing vocational religious degrees, siding with the state in a challenge brought by a Liberty University student. The court held that the Supreme Court’s decision in Locke v. Davey controlled and permitted states to withhold funding for religious instruction programs.
The Supreme Court allowed access to the abortion pill mifepristone by mail to remain in place while litigation continues. The decision pauses a lower court ruling that would have imposed new restrictions on the drug’s distribution.
A group of federal employees sued Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, alleging that religious messages sent through official USDA emails promoted Christianity in the workplace. The lawsuit claims the emails violated the Establishment Clause by amounting to government endorsement of religion.
An Iraqi court ruled in favor of a woman seeking to change her official religious designation from Islam to Christianity, a decision that could have broader implications for religious rights in the country.
France’s Senate rejected an assisted-dying bill this week, as Christian and pro-life groups called on lawmakers to preserve the decision. The debate has drawn continued attention from religious organizations and renewed disputes over end-of-life legislation.
Pleased to post below a link to the Mattone Center’s annual review for 2025-2026. Among the highlights: media productions, including podcasts and a video series on landmark cases in religious freedom; events, including international conferences and moot courts; and faculty scholarship. Thanks to everyone who has supported our activities–looking forward to next year!
In this episode of Legal Spirits, I speak with Andrea Pin about his new book, Dignity in Judgment, and the role of human dignity in contemporary constitutional law. We explore competing understandings of dignity—a secular, autonomy-based view and a more communal conception influenced by religious traditions—and consider how courts choose between them. Along the way, we discuss why the secular view appears to dominate in practice and how judicial formation shapes the meaning of dignity in constitutional adjudication.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
Bishop James Massa, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Doctrine, responded to Vice President Vance’s recent criticism of Pope Leo XIV’s Palm Sunday Homily, emphasizing that “When Pope Leo XIV speaks as supreme pastor of the universal Church, he is not merely offering opinions on theology, he is preaching the Gospel and exercising his ministry as the Vicar of Christ.”
This week, the Justice Department Office of Legal Policy’s Weaponization Working Group published a 37-page report which concluded, in part, that “the Biden DOJ ‘engaged in biased enforcement of the FACE Act’ and ‘pursued more severe charges and significantly harsher sentences for peaceful pro-life defendants than violent pro-abortion defendants.'”
In a press release following the final hearing of the President’s Religious Liberty Commission, Chairman Dan Patrick rejected the notion that the First Amendment requires a total separation of church and state.
The Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne and Rosary Hill Home, a hospice care facility in New York, filed suit in a New York federal district court challenging New York’s requirements for care of transgender patients.
On April 14th, a settlement was reached between the Coast Guard and three Coast Guard members who had brought a class action after they were denied religious exemptions from the military’s COVID vaccine mandate. Among other things, the Agreement requires the Coast Guard to remove references in personnel records of service members’ decision to remain unvaccinated.
Human dignity is ubiquitous in contemporary constitutional law, yet its meaning varies across jurisdictions and even among judges. In a new essay at Emory’s Canopy Forum, I review my friend Andrea Pin’s new book, Dignity in Judgment, which challenges the conventional view that dignity is solely a secular, autonomy-based concept and highlights its religious and communal roots. While I agree with Andrea that dignity has multiple intellectual sources, I argue that courts today overwhelmingly rely on a secular understanding in practice. This convergence, I suggest, reflects the intellectual formation and shared legal culture of judges, who interpret dignity through familiar frameworks shaped by modern constitutionalism.
I’ll be interviewing Andrea about his book in an upcoming Legal Spirits podcast, so please stay tuned! Meanwhle, you can read the full review here.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
Vice President J.D. Vance spoke regarding growing tension between the U.S. military and religious leaders and the pushback against current US military operations in Iran.
In Perry v. Marteney, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a law in West Virginia that required vaccinations for public school students without religious exemptions.
in Singh v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, a case regarding the transfer of a Sikh Temple into a trust, the court held that the ‘neutral principles exception’ to the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine can apply outside of church property cases.
In Maniar v. Noem, a D.C. District Court dismissed a suit brought by a Pakistani-American couple who claimed that being placed on a Screening List at the airport violated their free exercise rights.
In Johnson v. Fleming a Virginia federal district court dismissed Free Exercise claims regarding religious exclusions from a state tuition program.
Therapist Kaley Chiles at the Supreme Court (CSPAN)
In this short take, Mark Movsesian looks at the Supreme Court’s 8-1 decision this week in Chiles v. Salazar, involving a Christian therapist who challenged Colorado’s ban on so-called conversion therapy for minors. Formally, Chiles is not a free exercise case. But religion is clearly in the background—a reminder that law-and-religion controversies are often worked out through the First Amendment’s speech protections. Listen in!
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
The Supreme Court revived a lawsuit by a Mississippi street preacher who claims that his arrest for demonstrating near an amphitheater violated his free speech and religious liberty rights.
A federal judge ordered immigration officials to allow clergy and religious workers access to detained migrants in Minneapolis, ruling that denying pastoral visits likely violated religious liberty protections.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops filed amicus briefs with the Supreme Court arguing that turning away migrants at the border is unlawful and inconsistent with the nation’s moral obligations.
Members of Congress introduced legislation that would protect the tax-exempt status of churches and religious organizations from being revoked based on their views or speech.
India’s Maharashtra legislature passed a new anti-conversion law this week requiring advance notice before religious conversions and imposing criminal penalties for conversions obtained through coercion, fraud, or marriage. The law has drawn criticism from religious minority groups.
Earlier this month, the Mattone Center Student Fellows had the privilege of traveling to Rome to participate in the ninth International Moot Court Competition in Law and Religion, held on March 13 and 14 at the St. John’s University Rome campus. The competition brought together teams from law schools from the United States and Europe, including teams from Italy, Poland, and Ukraine–about 100 participants in all. This marked the first time St. John’s has hosted the competition. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ’83, a member of the Mattone Center’s board, served as one of the judges at the competition.
The competition problem centered on a hypothetical dispute between a religious school, Thomas More School, and the government of the State of Utopia, which had enacted an “Equality in Education Act” alleged to infringe upon the school’s right to freely exercise its religious beliefs. The fellows were divided into two teams: Kalina Mesrobian ’26 and Stacey Kaliabakos ’27 represented the school, while Vincent D’Avanzo ’27 and Isabel Lane ’27 argued on behalf of the government.
Being able to represent St. John’s in an international competition was an exciting and rewarding experience for our fellows. The fellows were were very fortunate to receive guidance from Center Director Mark Movsesian, St. John’s Law School Professor Robert Ruescher, and St. John’s Law alumnus James Herschlein, chair of the Litigation practice group at Arnold & Porter, who generously served as their coach and traveled to Rome to support the team in person. Their mentorship played a substantial role in helping our fellows grow their advocacy skills and confidence as they headed into the competition.
Beyond the “courtroom,” the experience in Rome was truly unforgettable. Our fellows had the opportunity to form friendships with students from different countries, schools, and legal traditions, showing them how the answers to questions at the intersection of law and religion can vary across the globe. They were also able to explore some of Rome’s most iconic sites, including the Vatican Museums, the Galleria Borghese, the Pantheon, the Trevi Fountain, the Spanish Steps, and the Colosseum.
Participating in this competition was a unique experience that strengthened the fellows’ legal skills, as well as their sense of community within the international legal world.
