Posted on by Mark Movsesian

On Christian Institutionalism in the Early Republic

The proper role of Christianity in American public life has sparked controversy from the beginning. Is the US a Christian nation, and what does that mean, exactly? Or is the US a secular republic? Like France, perhaps? Historian Miles Smith has written a new book, Religion & Republic: Christian America from the Founding to the Civil War, that argues that the true role of Christianity in the early Republic is captured by the phrase “Christian Institutionalism,” in which a public, Protestant Christianity coexisted with official disestablishment. Looks interesting. Here’s the description from the publisher’s website (Davenant):

In recent years, America’s status as a “Christian nation” has become an incredibly vexed question. This is not simply a debate about America’s present, or even its future–it has become a debate about its past. Some want to rewrite America’s history as having always been highly secular in order to ensure a similar future; others seek to reframe the American founding as a continuation of medieval Christendom in the hopes of reviving America’s religious identity today.

In this book, Miles Smith offers a fresh historical reading of America’s status as a Christian nation in the Early Republic era. Defined neither by secularism nor Christendom, America was instead marked by “Christian institutionalism.” Christianity–and Protestantism specifically–was always baked into the American republic’s diplomatic, educational, judicial, and legislative regimes and institutional Christianity in state apparatuses coexisted comfortably with disestablishment from the American Revolution until the beginning of the twenty-first century. 

Any productive discussion about America’s religious present or future must first reckon accurately with its past. With close attention to a wide range of sermons, letters, laws, court cases and more, Religion & Republic offers just such a reckoning

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A City on a Hill

I’d like to thank the members of our Law & Religion Reading Group who turned out last night for a wonderful discussion of John Winthrop’s famous essay, “A Model of Christian Charity” (1630), the source of the oft-repeated saying that America is “a city on a hill.” A 400-year old Puritan text came to life. Look for a new Legal Spirits podcast on the subject soon!

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  • German airline company Lufthansa has been fined $4 million for religious discrimination against a group of Jewish passengers. The incident occurred in 2022, when the passengers were refused boarding because of their failure to wear masks in compliance with the airline’s policy.
  • A Trial Court in Pakistan has granted bail to a Christian woman who was arrested on blasphemy charges brought by her Muslim neighbor.
  • The Texas Supreme Court will soon determine whether Southern Methodist University can cut its ties with the United Methodist Church due to theological differences.
  • A lawsuit has been filed in the Oklahoma Supreme Court challenging the recent requirement to incorporate the Bible into public school curricula.
  • A Washington District Court sentenced a defendant to 11 years in prison because of multiple arson attacks on Jehovah’s Witness institutions.
  • In Pennsylvania, Governor Shapiro signed a new law recognizing Diwali as a state holiday. Diwali is a holiday celebrated by Buddhists, Sikhs, and Hindus and takes place at the end of October.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian · 1 Comment

Constitutional Intolerance

Religious freedom begins with tolerance, but aspirationally goes beyond it, to the full participation of religious minorities in political and legal life. Lately, some European observers think that even tolerance for religious and other minorities is lacking. A book out from Cambridge next month, Constitutional Intolerance: The Fashioning of the Other in Europe’s Constitutional Repertoires, explores the phenomenon. The author is Marietta van der Tol (above), the Alfred Landecker Postdoctoral Fellow at Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government. Here’s the publisher’s description:

Constitutional Intolerance offers a deeper reflection on intolerance in politics and society today, explaining why minorities face the contestation of their public visibility, and how the law could protect them. Van der Tol refers to historical practices of toleration, distilling from it the category of ‘the other’ to the political community, whose presence, representation, and visibility is not self-evident and is often subject to regulation. The book considers ‘the other’ in the context of modern constitutions, with reference to (ethno)religious, ethnic, and sexual groups. Theoretical chapters engage questions about the time and temporality of otherness, and their ambivalent relationship with (public) space. It offers examples from across the liberal-illiberal divide: France, the Netherlands, Hungary, and Poland. It highlights that vulnerability towards intolerance is inscribed in the structures of the law, and is not merely inherent to either liberalism or illiberalism, as is often inferred.

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  • In DeVore v. University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, the Sixth Circuit found that a University did not discriminate against a University of Kentucky employee in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by denying the employee’s religious accommodation request that would’ve exempted her from a series of University COVID testing policies. The Sixth Circuit reasoned that the plaintiff offered no evidence to show a conflict between her religion and the University’s policies, instead presenting her objection the COVID policies as a reflection of her personal moral code.
  • In Esses v. Rosen, a federal district court in New York declined to issue a preliminary injunction prohibiting the defendant from issuing a “seiruv,” which is a form of rabbinical court notice that informs the public that the plaintiff has failed to respond to a summons from the rabbinical court. The court declined to intrude on questions of rabbinical court procedure, which would violate the First Amendment’s Establishment clause.
  • Luther Rice College and Seminary has filed a complaint in a federal district court in Georgia, alleging that the State of Georgia has violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments by excluding Luther Rice students from being eligible for a statewide financial student aid program due to the fact that Luther Rice College is a religious institution that the state has classified as a “school of theology.” Luther Rice alleges that the state’s exclusion of the school from its financial aid programs forces the college to forfeit its religious character, beliefs, and exercise or be completely barred from state government financial aid programs, which the college pleads is a violation of the Free Exercise clause and the Equal Protection clause.
  • The Archdiocese of Los Angeles has recently agreed to pay $880 million to 1,353 people who alleged they were sexually abused as children by Catholic clergy. To date, the settlement has been regarded as the single highest payout by a diocese.
  • In Kumar v. State of Karnataka, an Indian High Court found that a pair of individuals who barged into a mosque and shouted “Jai Sriram” (Glory to Lord Rama) did not violate a section of the Indian Penal Code that prohibits “deliberate and malicious outraging of the religious feelings of any class of citizens.” While the Indian Court conceded that the outburst would outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens, the High Court ultimately decided that the outburst did not have the “effect on bringing out peace or destruction of public order,” nor did it cause “public mischief or any rift.”
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  • In Solliz v. Knox County, Tennessee, a Muslim woman filed suit after she was required by a Knox County sheriff to remove her hijab for a booking photo following her arrest. The complaint alleged violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) and the Tennessee Preservation of Religious Freedom Act.
  • A Ukrainian court has extended the detention of an Orthodox bishop for two months after he was arrested for allegedly revealing army positions to the public in a sermon, having mentioned the presence of a road block that prevented access to a local monastery. The bishop was denied the possibility of posting bail, and the checkpoints in question were removed prior to the publication of his sermon online.
  • A petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond, after the Supreme Court of Oklahoma declared the certification of a Catholic-sponsored charter school violative of the state’s constitution and the Establishment Clause. The petition states that the exclusion of religious schools from the state’s charter program violates the Free Exercise Clause, and that the mere funding of religious schools by the state does not constitute state action.
  • The recently-passed Abortion Services Act in Scotland threatens prosecution against anyone praying within a 200-meter radius of an abortion facility, including within their own homes, if they can be seen or heard within the zone, and act in an intentional or reckless manner. Guidance provided by the government to facilitate compliance lists silent vigils and religious preaching as potentially actionable offenses, if conducted intentionally and recklessly.
  • The University of California has continued to deny wrongdoing following a California federal court’s order mandating a variety of measures to prevent the exclusion of Jewish students from parts of campus. The University claims responsibility lies with actors unaffiliated with the school, whereas the plaintiffs maintain the school’s complicity via its failure to act in the face of clear religious discrimination against its students.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Ending Persecution?

Readers of this blog and listeners to Legal Spirits will know that I’m skeptical that international human rights law can do much on its own to end religious persecution. Everything depends on state enforcement–and states, including the US, only get involved when their interests suggest they should. Even then, there is typically little the “international community” can do when local actors really want to punish a religious minority, other than offer asylum–collective action problems always seem to get in the way, and the international community typically loses interest in time. It’s a very sad fact. But I know that other people think this view is too pessimistic. For a more optimistic view on what international human rights law can do, here is a new book from the University of Notre Dame Press, Ending Persecution: Charting the Path to Global Religious Freedom, by longtime human rights lawyer Knox Thames. The publisher’s description follows:

Building on his extensive experience in the U.S. government and as an international human rights lawyer, H. Knox Thames provides fresh, decisive strategies to advance religious freedom for all.

Today, a scourge of religious persecution is impacting every faith community around the globe. In Ending Persecution: Charting the Path to Global Religious Freedom, author H. Knox Thames takes readers to some of the world’s most repressive countries in the Middle East and Asia, exposing the harsh reality of religious repression. Thames breaks down the devastating litany of human rights abuses faced by religious groups in these countries into four major types of persecution: terrorism in the Middle East, government-sponsored genocides in China and Burma, cultural changes due to extremism in Pakistan, and tyrannical democracy in Nepal and India.

Ending Persecution recounts the range of tools and policies that the U.S. government has used to encourage reform in repressive governments, leverage U.S. influence for the oppressed, and to reflect the best of American values of diversity, minority rights, and religious freedom. To help the persecuted in the twenty-first century, Thames argues, the United States must revitalize its approach and recommit to ending oppression by supporting coalition building and interfaith tolerance.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A New Book on Religious Freedom in the Middle East

I’m delighted to report that last month Brill released a new book by a great friend of the Mattone Center (and mine!) for many years, Professor Andrea Pin. Andrea, who teaches law at the University of Padua, has an encyclopedic knowledge of comparative law, especially the comparative law of church and state, and he has devoted much of his career to studying how law and religion interact in the Middle East. His new book, Religious Freedom without the Rule of Law: The Constitutional Odysseys of Afghanistan, Egypt, and Iraq and the Fate of the Middle East, addresses that interaction. Highly recommended! Here is the description from the publisher’s website:

The volume compares the efforts to instil the values and practices of the rule of law in the Middle East in the early twenty-first century with their disappointing performances in terms of safety, human rights, and, especially, religious freedom. It zooms in on Afghanistan, Egypt, and Iraq to argue that international interventions and local initiatives underestimated the ethno-religious mosaic of these countries and their political and constitutional culture.

The standard notion of the rule of law values individualism, equality, rights, and courts, which hardly fit the makeup of the Middle East. Securing stability and protecting religious freedom in the region requires compromising on the rule of law; the consociational model of constitutionalism would have better chances of achieving them.

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  • In Hope Community Church v. Warner, a federal district court held that a provision in West Virginia’s constitution, which bars churches from being incorporated, is unconstitutional.
  • Several Christians in India were arrested for distributing “religious materials” within government schools, and were charged with propagating religion in an illegal manner.
  • The Supreme Court of the United States is considering a queue of church-and-state related cases, including a Florida synagogue fighting to advertise religious celebrations on public transportation.
  • A Christian woman in Iran was arrested and has been imprisoned for weeks without charges; her family believes officials are subjecting her to brutal interrogation regarding other Christian community members.
  • A school assistant in England, who was fired because of Christian beliefs she expressed on social media, will have her case heard in the Court of Appeal after the initial tribunal held her dismissal lawful.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

The Rule of Law in Iran

Iran is one of the world’s few true theocracies. But that doesn’t mean the country lacks the rule of law. Iran doesn’t have the rule of law in a liberal, Western sense. But courts and judges exist, as do bodies of law that govern commerce, family disputes, and other matters. A new collection of essays from Cambridge, The Rule of Law in the Islamic Republic of Iran: Power, Institutions, and the Limits of Reform explores how the rule of law operates in Iran. The editors are Hadi Enayat of Aga Khan University and Mirjam Kunkler of the Institute for Advanced Legal Study. Here’s the description from the Cambridge website:

After Iran’s 1979 Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini denounced the secular legal system of the Pahlavis and pledged his commitment to distinctly Islamic conceptions of law and justice: the application of both the shariʿa and the rule of law (hākemiyat-e qānun) became major ideological pillars of the Islamic Republic. This precipitated the Islamization of the legal system, the judiciary and the courts, a process which still continues today and is the subject of intense ideological and political contestation. The Rule of Law in Iran is the first comprehensive analysis of judicial and legal institutions of the Islamic Republic of Iran in their social, political and historical contexts. Scholars and practitioners of law, many with experience of working in Iran, shed light on how the rule of law has fared across a variety of areas, from criminal law to labour law, family law, minority rights, policing, the legal profession, the visual and performing arts, trade law, and medicine.