American Religious Liberty: An International Perspective
Abstract
This Article compares United States religious freedom jurisprudence with prevailing international human rights norms. I distill these international religious freedom norms and evaluate how selected US Supreme Court cases both follow and depart from these norms. Part I identifies six principles of religious freedom defended by the American framers who crafted the First Amendment in 1791: liberty of conscience; free exercise of religion; religious pluralism; religious equality; separation of church and state; and no establishment of religion. Part II summarizes the mostly parallel norms of religious freedom in the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, and the 1989 Vienna Concluding Document. Part III shows how the US Court’s cases on freedom of conscience, free exercise, and religious equality compare favorably to international standards, although some religious minorities have often not fared well. Some of the Court’s cases defending the principle of separation of church and state mesh well with international concerns for religious autonomy. But the Court’s establishment clause cases have gone well beyond international norms in expunging religion from public schools and removing state aid for religious groups and services. The Article concludes that religious freedom remains a strong constitutional value in American law and culture, but it needs to be better integrated; international religious freedom norms offer valuable lessons to that end.
Downloads
References
Aleinikoff, T. A. (2004). Thinking Outside the Sovereignty Box: Transnational Law and the U.S. Constitution, Texas Law Review 82, pp. 1989-2016.
Bassett, W. (1997-2007). Religious Organizations and the Law, 2 vols. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.
Evans, C. M. (2001). Freedom of Religion under the European Convention on Human Rights. New York–Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evans, M. D. (1997). Religious Liberty and International Law in Europe. Cambridge–New York: Cambridge University Press.
Greenawalt, K. (2006-08). Religion and the Constitution, 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Henkin L. (1995). U.S. Ratification of Human Rights Conventions: The Ghost of Senator Bricker. American Journal of International Law 89, pp. 341-350.
Henkin, L. (1979). Rights, American and Human. Columbia Law Review 79, pp. 405-425.
Holmes, O. W., Jr. (1881). The Common Law. Boston: Little Brown. F.L. Israel (ed.) (1966). State of the Union Messages of the Presidents, 3 vols. New York: Chelsea House.
Lerner, N. (2006). Religion, Secular Beliefs, and Human Rights: 25 Years After the 1981 Declaration. Leiden–Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Lindholm, T.W., Durham, C., Jr. & Tahzib-Lie, B.G. (eds.) (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief: A Deskbook Leiden–Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Morrisson, C.C. Jr. (1973). Margin of Appreciation in European Human Rights Law. Revue des droits de l’homme 6, pp. 263-286.
Neumann, G. (1997). The Global Dimension of RFRA. Constitutional Commentary 14, pp. 33 y ss.
Roosevelt, F. D. (6-I-1941). Roosevelt’s Eighth Annual Message to Congress. En https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=70&page=transcript (último acceso 7-XI-2019).
Stahnke, T. & Martin, J. P. (1988). Religion and Human Rights: Basic Documents. New York: Columbia University Press.
Stewart, D. P. (1993). United States Ratification of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: The Significance of the Reservations, Understandings, and Declarations. DePaul Law Review 42, pp. 1183-1207.
Symposium (2005). The Permissible Scope of Legal Limitations on the Freedom of Religion and Belief. Emory International Law Review 19, pp. 465-1320.
Symposium (2006). What’s Wrong with Rights for Children? Emory International Law Review, pp. 1-239
Symposium (2007). The Foundations and Frontiers of Religious Liberty: A 25th Anniversary Celebration of the 1981 UN Declaration on Religious Tolerance. Emory International Law Review 21, pp. 1-276
Taylor, P. (2005). Freedom of Religion: UN and European Human Rights Law and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Witte, J., Jr. & van der Vyver, J. D. (eds.) (1996). Religious Human Rights in Global Perspective, 2 vols. The Hague–London–Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Witte, J., Jr. (2005). Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment, 2th ed. Boulder–London: Westview Press.
Witte, J., Jr. (2006). Facts and Fictions About the History of Separation of Church and State. Journal of Church and State, 48(1), pp. 15-46.
Witte, J., Jr. (2006). God’s Joust, God’s Justice: Law and Religion in the Western Tradition. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
Witte, J., Jr. (2007). The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion, and Human Rights in Early Modern Calvinism. Cambridge–New York: Cambridge University Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors publishing in our Journal comply to the following terms:
1. Authors keep their work’s copyrights, but they guarantee Ius Humani Law Journal to be the first publisher of their papers. They grant the Journal will a Creative Commons Attribution License, under which their work can be shared with the condition that it is appropriately cited.
2. Authors are aware and accept that the Ius Humani Team will try to give the greatest diffusion to the Journal, which means, among other things, that its printed and electronic editions will be distributed among different databases and scientific indexes.
3. Authors can establish further clauses for non exclusive distribution, such as publication on a separate book or placing in an institutional data-base. Nevertheless, a note should be always added to explain that the paper was originally published in Ius Humani Law Journal.
4. We permit and encourage authors to share their work through Internet before and during the editorial process to receive further recommendations and wider references (we recommend you read the article The Effect of Open Access).
