More is more: Strengthening free exercise, speech, and association

Minnesota Law Review

Volumn 99, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 485-534

  Inazu, John D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84922541368     PISSN: 00265535     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (274)

1. Vincent Blasi, The Pathological Perspective and the First Amendment, 85 COLUM. L. REV. 449, 478 (1985).
2. Philip Hamburger, More Is Less, 90 VA. L. REV. 835, 885 (2004);
3. Kenneth L. Karst, The Freedom of Intimate Association, 89 YALE L.J. 624, 654-55 (1980).
4. Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984).
5. JOHN D. INAZU, LIBERTY'S REFUGE: THE FORGOTTEN FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY 136-39 (2012).
6. George C. Christie, Why the First Amendment Should Not Be Interpreted from the Pathological Perspective: A Response to Professor Blasi, 1986 DUKE L.J. 683 (1986).
7. MICHAEL MCCONNELL ET AL., RELIGION AND THE CONSTITUTION 782 (2011).
8. Philip Hamburger, Getting Permission, 101 NW. U. L. REV. 405 (2007);
9. Philip Hamburger, The New Censorship: Institutional Review Boards, 2004 SUP. CT. REV. 271.
10. See generally Philip Hamburger, Beyond Protection, 109 COLUM. L. REV. 1823 (2009).
11. Hamburger, Getting Permission, supra note 8, at 414.
12. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 874.
13. Hamburger, supra note 2.
14. Robert Post & Reva Siegel, Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and Backlash, 42 HARV. C.R.-C.L. L. REV. 373, 373 (2007).
15. Hamburger, Beyond Protection, supra note 8, at 1966 n.459.
16. See, e.g., W. Va. State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943);
17. cf. John D. Inazu, Virtual Assembly, 98 CORNELL L. REV. 1093, 1123 (2013).
18. Cf. Frederick Schauer, Codifying the First Amendment: New York v. Ferber, 1982 SUP. CT. REV. 285, 315.
19. See generally INAZU, supra note 3;
20. John D. Inazu, The Strange Origins of the Constitutional Right of Association, 77 TENN. L. REV. 485 (2010);
21. John D. Inazu, The Unsettling "Well-Settled" Law of Freedom of Association, 43 CONN. L. REV. 149 (2010).
22. See generally INAZU, supra note 3.
23. 468 U.S. 609, 617-22 (1984).
24. See INAZU, supra note 3, at 136.
25. See generally John D. Inazu, supra note 16.
26. LAURENCE H. TRIBE, AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 583 (1978);
27. Pierre J. Schlag, An Attack on Categorical Approaches to Freedom of Speech, 30 UCLA L. REV. 671 (1983).
28. See, e.g., Roberts, 468 U.S. at 628.
29. Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000).
30. Blasi, supra note 1, at 450.
31. See generally Blasi, supra note 1.
32. See Karst, supra note 2.
33. Blasi, supra note 1, at 477.
34. see also Frederick Schauer, Categories and the First Amendment: A Play in Three Acts, 34 VAND. L. REV. 265, 307 (1981).
35. Blasi, supra note 1, at 467.
36. John D. Inazu, The Freedom of the Church (New Revised Standard Version), 21 J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 335 (2013).
37. See also RICHARD JOHN NEUHAUS, THE NAKED PUBLIC SQUARE: RELIGION AND DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA 258 (1984);
38. Douglas NeJaime, Doctrine in Context, 127 HARV. L. REV. F. 10, 18 (2013).
39. Blasi, supra note 1, at 479.
40. See Hamburger, supra note 2, at 837;
41. JAMES MADISON, MEMORIAL AND REMONSTRANCE AGAINST RELIGIOUS ASSESSMENTS (June 20, 1785)8 THE PAPERS OF JAMES MADISON 295, 298 (Robert A. Rutland et al. eds., 1973)
42. See Hamburger, supra note 2, at 841-42;
43. MADISON, supra note 55, at 299.
44. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 835;
45. Michael W. McConnell, The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion, 103 HARV. L. REV. 1409, 1463 (1990)
46. quoting S. COBB, THE RISE OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY IN AMERICA 492 (1902).
47. 8 THE WRITINGS OF JAMES MADISON 98, 100 (G. Hunt ed., 1901).
48. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 845 n.27.
49. Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890).
50. See also Late Corp. of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1 (1890).
51. Davis, 133 U.S. at 133.
52. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 848.
53. Peter de Marneffe, Rights, Reasons, and Freedom of Association, in FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION 145, 146 (Amy Gutmann ed., 1998);
54. cf. STANLEY FISH, THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS FREE SPEECH AND IT'S A GOOD THING, TOO 104 (1994).
55. See, e.g., Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 130 S. Ct. 2705, 2723-24 (2010);
56. Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 617-29 (1984).
57. See, e.g., Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109 (1959);
58. Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 (1951).
59. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 858.
60. Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963),
61. Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599 (1961).
62. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 877
63. Emp't Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990),
64. Smith, 494 U.S. at 882-91.
65. Compare Sherbert, 374 U.S. at 398,
66. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 219-29 (1972).
67. Adam Winkler, Fatal in Theory and Strict in Fact: An Empirical Analysis of Strict Scrutiny in the Federal Courts, 59 VAND. L. REV. 793, 858-62 (2006)
68. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb(a)(4).
69. See Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n, 132 S. Ct. 694, 701 (2012);
70. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 532-46 (1993).
71. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 877.
72. see Lukumi, 508 U.S. 520.
73. Lukumi, 508 U.S. at 546.
74. See, e.g., Richard F. Duncan, Free Exercise Is Dead, Long Live Free Exercise: Smith, Lukumi and the General Applicability Requirement, 3 U. PA. J. CONST. L. 850 (2001).
75. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 881.
76. Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333, 342-43 (1890).
77. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 837.
78. McDaniel v. Paty, 435 U.S. 618 (1978),
79. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 876-77.
80. McDaniel, 435 U.S. at 618.
81. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 883.
82. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 858.
83. Emp't Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 888 (1990).
84. quoting United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252, 263 n.2 (1982).
85. quoting Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U. S. 599, 606 (1961).
86. See Brief for Petitioners at 5, Emp't Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990).
87. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n, 132 S. Ct. 694, 706 (2012).
88. Michael W. McConnell, Reflections on Hosanna-Tabor, 35 HARV. J.L. & PUB. POL'Y 821, 836-37 (2012).
89. Hosanna-Tabor, 132 S. Ct. at 707.
90. MARK A. NOLL & CAROLYN NYSTROM, IS THE REFORMATION OVER? AN EVANGELICAL ASSESSMENT OF CONTEMPORARY ROMAN CATHOLICISM 85-86 (2005).
91. Carl H. Esbeck, A Religious Organization's Autonomy in Matters of Self-Governance: Hosanna-Tabor and the First Amendment, 13 ENGAGE 114, 118 (2012).
92. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. 13-354 (U.S. June 30, 2014).
93. See, e.g., Marci A. Hamilton, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Confirms That RFRA Is Extreme Religious Liberty, CAMBRIDGE BLOG (June 30, 2014), http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2014/06/burwell-v-hobby-lobby-confirms-that-rfra-is-extreme-religious-liberty.
94. See, e.g., Americans Concerned About Religious Freedom, BARNA GROUP (Jan. 18, 2013), https://www.barna.org/barna-update/culture/601-most-americans-are-concerned-about-restrictions-in-religious-freedom.
95. cf. Michael W. McConnell, Why Protect Religious Freedom?, 123 YALE L.J. 770, 772 (2013).
96. See Douglas Laycock, Sex, Atheism, and the Free Exercise of Religion, 88 U. DET. MERCY L. REV. 407, 424 (2011).
97. See Everson v. Bd. of Educ., 330 U.S. 1, 9-16 (1947).
98. See W. Va. State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 642 (1943).
99. Everson, 330 U.S. at 16.
100. See STEVEN H. SHIFFRIN, THE RELIGIOUS LEFT AND CHURCH-STATE RELATIONS 1 (2009).
101. Hamburger, supra note 2, at 848.
102. See, e.g., JASON C. BIVINS, THE FRACTURE OF GOOD ORDER: CHRISTIAN ANTILIBERALISM AND THE CHALLENGE TO AMERICAN POLITICS 2-3 (2003);
103. SHIFFRIN, supra note 118, at 123.
104. See BIVINS, supra, at 30-31;
105. see also Thomas C. Berg, Progressive Arguments for Religious Organizational Freedom: Reflections on the HHS Mandate, 21 J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 279, 306 (2013).
106. See Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc (2000).
107. Laycock, supra note 114, at 422.
108. Nelson Tebbe, Nonbelievers, 97 VA. L. REV. 1111, 1120 (2011);
109. see also Laycock, supra note 114, at 420.
110. See Laycock, supra note 114, at 419-20.
111. See, e.g., Mike Meno, 'Nonsectarian' Prayer Still Alienates Nontheists, SECULAR COALITION FOR AMERICA (Aug. 4, 2011), http://www.secular.org/blogs/mike-meno/%E2%80%98nonsectarian%E2%80%99-prayer-still-alienates-nontheists.
112. See Town of Greece v. Galloway, 134 S. Ct. 1811, 1820 (2014).
113. Eugene Volokh, The Priority of Law: A Response to Michael Stokes Paulsen, 39 PEPP. L. REV. 1223, 1224 (2013);
114. see also Laycock, supra note 114, at 422.
115. See Third Amendment Rights Group Celebrates Another Successful Year, THE ONION (Oct. 5, 2007), http://www.theonion.com/articles/third-amendment-rights-group-celebrates-another-su.
116. Cf. Kenji Yoshino, The New Equal Protection, 124 HARV. L. REV. 747, 794 (2011).
117. See Paul Horwitz, Or of the [Blog], 11 NEXUS 45, 57 (2006).
118. Brown v. Entm't Merchs. Ass'n, 131 S. Ct. 2729, 2732-33 (2011).
119. McCullen v. Coakley, 571 F.3d 167, 172 (1st Cir. 2009).
120. Harris v. Quinn, 656 F.3d 692, 694 (7th Cir. 2011).
121. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coal., 535 U.S. 234, 238 (2002)l
122. Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 100-01 (1974).
123. Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S. Ct. 1207, 1214-15 (2011).
124. Communist Party of the United States v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 367 U.S. 1, 137 (1961).
125. See, e.g., Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. 13-354 (U.S. June 30, 2014);
126. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n, 132 S. Ct. 694 (2012);
127. Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Sebelius, No. 13-cv-2611-WJM-BNB, 2013 WL 6839900 (D. Colo. Dec. 27, 2013);
128. see also Holt v. Hobbs, 134 S. Ct. 1512 (2014).
129. See, e.g., Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78, 118 (1970).
130. See, e.g., School District of Abington Twp. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 257 (1963).
131. See Hamburger, supra note 2, at 837.
132. Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 303-04 (1940).
133. See Hamburger, supra note 2.
134. MCCONNELL, ET AL., supra note 6, at 76.
135. Heffron v. Int'l Soc'y for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., 452 U.S. 640, 654 (1981).
136. 455 U.S. 252 (1982).
137. See also Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. 13-354, slip op. at 47 (U.S. 2014).
138. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).
139. See also Frederick Mark Gedicks, Toward a Constitutional Jurisprudence of Religious Group Rights, 1989 WIS. L. REV. 99, 130 (1989).
140. Cf. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc ., No. 13-354, slip op. at 29;
141. Frederick Schauer, The Boundaries of the First Amendment: A Preliminary Exploration of Constitutional Salience, 117 HARV. L. REV. 1765, 1768 (2004).
142. Cf. FISH, supra note 67, at 102 (1994).
143. see J. M. Balkin, Some Realism About Pluralism: Legal Realist Approaches to the First Amendment, 1990 DUKE L.J. 375, 390 (1990),
144. See also James Boyd White, Law As Rhetoric, Rhetoric As Law: The Arts of Cultural and Communal Life, 52 U. CHI. L. REV. 684, 688-91 (1985).
145. Schauer, supra note 147, at 1170-71.
146. Cf. Schauer, supra note 18, at 305.
147. Cf. Schauer, supra note 18, at 315.
148. 315 U.S. 568, 571-72 (1942).
149. United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460, 468 (2010).
150. Cf. Stevens, 559 U.S. at 470.
151. quoting New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 763-64 (1982).
152. See Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333, 344 (1890).
153. See Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697, 716 (1931);
154. see also United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1, 7-8 (1953).
155. 133 U.S. 333 (1980).
156. See Davis, 133 U.S. at 341-42.
157. Brown v. Buhman, 947 F. Supp. 2d 1170, 1222 (D. Utah 2013).
158. See Maura Strassberg, The Crime of Polygamy, 12 TEMP. POL. & CIV. RTS. L. REV. 353, 363 (2003).
159. Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 492 (1957).
160. City of Erie v. Pap's A. M., 529 U.S. 277, 302 (2000);
161. Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 501 U.S. 560, 571-72 (1991).
162. Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186, 199 (1986);
163. see also Karst, supra note 2, at 658.
164. See, e.g., Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 605 (2003),
165. overruling Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).
166. United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460 (2010),
167. Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n, 131 S. Ct. 2729 (2011).
168. Stevens, 559 U.S. at 481-82,
169. Brown, 131 S. Ct. at 2742;
170. Brown, 131 S. Ct. at 2742.
171. Stevens, 559 U.S. at 460.
172. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460 (No. 08-769).
173. citing JOHN LOCKE, SOME THOUGHTS CONCERNING EDUCATION 91 (John William Adamson, ed., 2007.
174. Brown v. Entm't Merch. Ass'n, 131 S. Ct. 2729 (No. 08-1448).
175. See Ilya Somin, Public Opinion, Anti-Discrimination Law, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, THE VOLOKH CONSPIRACY (May 24, 2010, 4:30 PM), http://www.volokh.com/2010/05/24/public-opinion-anti-discrimination-law-and-the-civil-rights-act-of-1964.
176. see also Paul Burstein, Public Opinion, Demonstrations, and the Passage of Antidiscrimination Legislation, 43 PUB. OPINION Q. 157, 162-62 (1979);
177. See, e.g., Michael J. Klarman, Windsor and Brown: Marriage Equality and Racial Equality, 127 HARV. L. REV. 127, 130 (2013).
178. Burstein, supra note 165, at 163.
179. See Mario L. Barnes et al., A Post-Race Equal Protection?, 98 GEO. L.J. 967, 972 (2010)
180. Shelby County v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612, 2631 (2013),1
181. Adam Winkler, The Supreme Court's Ruling and the End of the Civil-Rights Era, THE DAILY BEAST (June 25, 2013), http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/25/the-supreme-court-s-ruling-and-the-end-of-the-civil-rights-era.html
182. see also Gráinne De Búrca, The Trajectories of European and American Antidiscrimination Law, 60 AM. J. COMP. L. 1, 3 (2012).
183. see, e.g., JOAN WILLIAMS, UNBENDING GENDER: WHY FAMILY AND WORK CONFLICT AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT (2000);
184. Reva B. Siegel, She the People: The Nineteenth Amendment, Sex Equality, Federalism, and the Family, 115 HARV. L. REV. 947 (2002).
185. Klarman, supra note 166, at 130.
186. Andrew Gelman et al., Over Time, a Gay Marriage Groundswell, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 22, 2010, at 3.
187. Klarman, supra note 166, at 155.
188. See Growing Public Support for Same-Sex Marriage, PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS (Feb. 16, 2012), http://www.people-press.org/2012/02/07/growing-public-support-for-same-sex-marriage.
189. Klarman, supra note 166, at 133.
190. Erik Eckholm, As Victories Pile Up, Gay Rights Advocates Cheer 'Milestone Year', N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 8, 2012, at P7.
191. Klarman, supra note 166, at 135.
192. see also Barry Friedman, The Counter-Majoritarian Problem and the Pathology of Constitutional Scholarship, 95 NW. U. L. REV. 933, 936 (2001).
193. 478 U.S. 186 (1986),
194. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).
195. 517 U.S. 620 (1996).
196. Hurley v. Irish-Am. Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc., 515 U.S. 557, 559 (1995).
197. Romer, 517 U.S. at 623.
198. Lawrence, 539 U.S. 558.
199. overruling Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).
200. 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013).
201. Elizabeth B. Wydra, Reading the Opinions - and the Tea Leaves - in United States v. Windsor, 2012-13 CATO SUP. CT. REV. 95, 95;
202. see also Amy Howe, A Home Run but Not a Grand Slam for Gay-Marriage Advocates: In Plain English, SCOTUSBLOG (June 26, 2013, 3:58 PM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/a-home-run-but-not-a-grand-slam-for-gay-marriage-advocates-in-plain-english.
203. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2693-94.
204. Emp't Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990).
205. See 139 CONG. REC. 26,416 (1993).
206. S. 2081, 106th Cong. (2000);
207. H.R. 1691, 106th Cong. (1999);
208. S. 2148, 105th Cong. (1998);
209. H.R. 4019, 105th Cong. (1998).
210. Laycock, supra note 114, at 412-13.
211. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n, 132 S. Ct. 694 (2012).
212. See John D. Inazu, The Four Freedoms and the Future of Religious Liberty, 92 N.C. L. REV. 787, 824 (2014)
213. Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661 (2010).
214. See Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
215. See Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 501 U.S. 560, 566 (1991).
216. See Clark v. Cmty. for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288, 293-95 (1984).
217. See Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Ass'n, 436 U.S. 447, 455-56 (1978);
218. Va. State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Va. Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 762 (1976).
219. Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87 (1974),
220. Ashcroft v. Am. Civil Liberties Union, 535 U.S. 564, 611 (2002).
221. 418 U.S. at 92-93.
222. See United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460, 467 (2010).
223. See Brown v. Entm't Merch. Ass'n, 131 S. Ct. 2729 (2011).
224. See United States v. Alvarez, 132 S. Ct. 2537, 2543 (2012).
225. see SHAWN FRANCIS PETERS, JUDGING JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES: RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION AND THE DAWN OF THE RIGHTS REVOLUTION 1-18 (2000).
226. See generally Inazu, supra note 196.
227. See, e.g., Vincent Blasi & Seana v. Shiffrin, The Story of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette: The Pledge of Allegiance and the Freedom of Thought, in FIRST AMENDMENT STORIES 115 (Richard W. Garnett & Andrew Koppelman eds., 2012).
228. 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
229. Joseph Blocher, Rights To and Not To, 100 CALIF. L. REV. 761, 789 (2012).
230. See Yoshino, supra note 127, at 794.
231. quoting Theda Skocpol, Targeting Within Universalism: Politically Viable Policies to Combat Poverty in the United States, in THE URBAN UNDERCLASS 411, 414 (Christopher Jencks & Paul E. Peterson eds., 1991).
232. See generally INAZU, supra note 3, at 63-117.
233. See also Ashutosh Bhagwat, Associational Speech, 120 YALE L.J. 978 (2011).
234. 357 U.S. 449 (1958).
235. LUCAS A. POWE, JR., THE WARREN COURT AND AMERICAN POLITICS 165 (2000).
236. Patterson, 357 U.S. at 460.
237. 468 U.S. 609 (1984).
238. See ROBERT D. PUTNAM, BOWLING ALONE: THE COLLAPSE AND REVIVAL OF AMERICAN COMMUNITY (2000).
239. See generally INAZU, supra note 3, at 160-62.
240. Roberts, 468 U.S. at 618-19.
241. see INAZU, supra note 3, at 136-41.
242. City of Dallas v. Stanglin, 490 U.S. 19 (1989).
243. Stanglin, 490 U.S. at 24.
244. Poyer v. Village of Des Plaines, 18 Ill. App. 225, 225 (1885).
245. 229 F.3d 435, 442 (3d Cir. 2000).
246. See also Chi Iota Colony of Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity v. City Univ. of N.Y., 502 F.3d 136, 147 (2d Cir. 2007).
247. see Joshua P. Roling, Functional Intimate Association Analysis: A Doctrinal Shift To Save the Roberts Framework, 61 DUKE L.J. 903 (2012).
248. Pi Lambda Phi, 229 F.3d at 439.
249. See Roling, supra note 231, at 923-28.
250. See, e.g., AFRICAN AMERICAN FRATERNITIES AND SORORITIES: THE LEGACY AND THE VISION (Tamara L. Brown et al. eds., 2012).
251. See INAZU, supra note 3, at 138-39.
252. See, e.g., Brief of Amici Curiae Evangelical Scholars, in Support of Petitioner at 9, Christian Legal Soc'y v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661 (No. 08-1371).
253. Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661, 688-89 (2010).
254. see John D. Inazu, Justice Ginsburg and Religious Liberty, 63 HASTINGS L.J. 1213, 1233-36 (2012).
255. Cf. ANDREW KOPPELMAN & TOBIAS BARRINGTON WOLFF, A RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE? 81-104 (2009).
256. see Inazu, supra note 196
257. Bob Jones Univ. v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1983).
258. See, e.g., MARC O. DEGIROLAMI, THE TRAGEDY OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM (2013);
259. Patrick McKinley Brennan, The Liberty of the Church: Source, Scope, and Scandal, 21 J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES (2013);
260. Richard W. Garnett, Do Churches Matter? Towards an Institutional Understanding of the Religion Clauses, 53 VILL. L. REV. 273 (2008);
261. Richard W. Garnett, Religion and Group Rights: Are Churches (Just) Like the Boy Scouts?, 22 ST. JOHN'S J. LEGAL COMMENT. 515 (2007);
262. Richard W. Garnett, The Freedom of the Church, 4 J. CATH. SOC. THOUGHT 59 (2007);
263. Richard W. Garnett, "The Freedom of the Church": (Towards) An Exposition, Translation, and Defense, 21 J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 33 (2013);
264. Paul Horwitz, Churches As First Amendment Institutions: Of Sovereignty and Spheres, 44 HARV. C.R.-C.L. L. REV. 79 (2009);
265. Steven D. Smith, Freedom of Religion or Freedom of the Church?, in LEGAL RESPONSES TO RELIGIOUS PRACTICES IN THE UNITED STATES: ACCOMMODATION AND ITS LIMITS 249 (Austin Sarat ed., 2012).
266. see Marc DeGirolami, "Is More Less? Or is More More?", Mirror of Justice (July 24, 2014), available at http://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2014/07/is-more-less-or-is-more-more.html.
267. See, e.g., JOHN HOPE FRANKLIN & ALFRED A. MOSS JR., FROM SLAVERY TO FREEDOM: A HISTORY OF AFRICAN AMERICANS 376-77 (1994);
268. LINDA J. LUMSDEN, RAMPANT WOMEN: SUFFRAGISTS AND THE RIGHT OF ASSEMBLY 17-19 (1997).
269. See Gay Students Org. of the Univ. of N.H. v. Bonner, 509 F.2d 652, 659-61 (1st Cir. 1974);
270. see also Brief of Gays & Lesbians for Individual Liberty as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner at 11, Christian Legal Soc'y v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661 (2010) (No. 08-1371), 2010 WL 530513.
271. ALASDAIR MACINTYRE, AFTER VIRTUE: A STUDY IN MORAL THEORY 175 (1981).
272. Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 25 (1971).
273. See Robert K. Vischer, How Necessary Is the Right of Assembly?, 89 WASH. U. L. REV. 1403 (2012).
274. See, e.g., Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. 13-354 (U.S. 2014).