Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice
Abstract
The article argues that the Roberts Court has adopted a conservative approach in religious freedom cases, shifting toward a jurisprudence that favors Christianity and undermines the separation of church and state. This approach, rooted in tradition and a de facto Christian America, has led to significant changes in both Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause doctrines. The Court's decisions increasingly protect Christian practices and institutions while marginalizing non-Christian religions, reflecting a broader ideological shift toward judicial engagement and away from principles of federalism and judicial restraint.
Disciplines
First Amendment | Judges | Jurisprudence | Law | Law and Politics | Law and Society | Supreme Court of the United States
Recommended Citation
Stephen M. Feldman,
The Roberts Court's Transformative Religious Freedom Cases: The Doctrine and the Politics of Grievance,
28
Cardozo J. Equal Rts. & Soc. Just.
507
(2022).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cardozoersj/vol28/iss3/3
Included in
First Amendment Commons, Judges Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons