American Constitution Society

Skip to content



Religion Clauses

No issue was more central to our Nation's founding than freedom of religion and no part of the Constitution continues to capture the imaginations and passions of Americans more than the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment. The Religion Clauses Group provides a forum for discussion about the meaning and interpretation of the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses and also investigates broader questions regarding religion in America -- including the appropriate relationship between church and state in contemporary society and the role of religion and religious belief in American politics and public life.

The Issue Group Co-Chairs are:


To get involved in the work of the Religion Clauses Issue Group, please fill out the Issue Group Sign-Up Form.

Also, please note that ACS ResearchLink features a number of topics related to the Religion Clauses Issue Group’s work on which law students are encouraged to focus their academic scholarship.
Recent Stories

A Constitutional Framework for Addressing Religious Viewpoints in Public Classrooms


Edward Correia

Mon, 04/21/2008

ACS is pleased to distribute an Issue Brief by Edward Correia, Washington D.C. attorney and adjunct professor at American University's Washington College of Law, entitled, “A Constitutional Framework for Addressing Religious Viewpoints in Public School Classrooms.”


In the debate over the constitutional separation of church and state in the U.S., one ongoing issue is how religious viewpoints may be addressed in our nation’s public schools. In this paper, the author takes on this sometimes controversial subject by reviewing various possible approaches and examining those approaches in light of the legal precedent in this area of the law. Throughout the paper, the author uses the specific examples of the teaching of creationism, intelligent design, and evolution in science class to illustrate community tensions over these issues and to convey his views on what is constitutionally permissible and what is not. Correia concludes by arguing that it is possible to distinguish among three distinct classroom approaches in specific course contexts: acknowledging religious beliefs, explaining religious beliefs and endorsing religious beliefs. Under his approach, the first is always constitutionally permissible, the second may be permissible depending upon the context, and the third fails to pass constitutional muster. He advocates a thoughtful, nuanced approach that respects religious freedom, diversity and tolerance while advocating compliance with the Constitution’s prohibition on the State establishment of religion.

AttachmentSize
Correia Religious Viewpoints Issue Brief.pdf125.14 KB

ACS Releases Papers from "The Religion Clauses in the 21st Century" Symposium

ACS and the West Virginia Law Review are pleased to announce that the papers written for “The Religion Clauses in the 21st Century” symposium held at the West Virginia University College of Law are now available.

Written by scholars in the law of church and state, the symposium papers reflect a variety of perspectives on issues organized according to these themes: “The Religion Clauses in Institutional Contexts,” “Government Religious Expression,” “Accommodation of Religion,” and “Religion and Politics.” Two of the papers reflect the views of the featured speakers: Florida State University Law Professor Steven Gey’s piece prepares us for “Life After the Establishment Clause” while University of Michigan Law Professor Douglas Laycock’s article explores the topic of “Substantive Neutrality Revisited.” The set of articles was published in Fall 2007 in Volume 110 of the West Virginia Law Review, which is dedicated to Professor Gey.

2007 ACS National Convention Breakout Session Discusses "The Establishment Clause and Standing: Injury and Enforcement "

2007/07/28 | 2007 ACS National Convention | The Establishment Clause and Standing

Although some predicted that the Supreme Court would directly overturn its precedent in Flast v. Cohen, which held that taxpayers have standing to bring Establishment Clause challenges to government spending, the Court did not go quite that far this term. Yet in Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, the Court denied standing, shielding the Bush Administration's faith-based initiatives from taxpayer challenges on the ground that Flast applies only to programs funded by express Congressional enactment. Experts on church-state law explore the issue of standing, grounding the discussion in practical examples such as government displays of religious symbols and state funding of faith-based organizations. What is the practical effect of Hein? Does the Court's decision shed first light on how the Roberts Court is likely to approach the law of church and state? What additional challenges are likely to be brought in this area of law?

More Stories