Religious liberty and the moral structure of constitutional rights

Legal Theory

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 253-268

  Eisgruber, Christopher L ^a   Sager, Lawrence G ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008188670     PISSN: 13523252     EISSN: 14698048     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s1352325200063023     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. We first articulated our theory in Christopher L. Eisgruber and Lawrence G. Sager, The Vulnerability of Conscience: The Constitutional Basis for Protecting Religious Conduct, 61 U. CHI. L. REV. 1245 (1994). We have continued to elaborate the theory in subsequent work; see, e.g., Christopher L. Eisgruber and Lawrence G. Sager, Equal Regard, in LAWAND RELIGION: A CRITICAL ANTHOLOGY (Stephen Feldman ed., forthcoming 2000), and Christopher L. Eisgruber and Lawrence G. Sager, Congressional Power and Religious Liberty After City of Boerne v. Flores, 1997 SUP. CT. REV. 79.
2. See, e.g., Matthew D. Adler, Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure of American Constitutional Law, 97 MICH. L. REV. 1, 29-30 (1998); Michael C. Dorf, Incidental Burdens on Fundamental Rights, 109 HARV. L. REV. 1175, 1210-19 (1996); see also Michael C. Dorf, Facial Challenges to State and Federal Statutes, 46 STAN. L. REV. 235, 258 n.87 (1994).
3. Adler, Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure of American Constitutional Law note 6.
4. General discussions of the doctrine include Richard H. Fallon, Jr., Making Sense of Overbreadth, 100 YALE L.J. 853 (1991), and Henry Paul Monaghan, Overbreadth, 1981 SUP. CT. REV. 1.
5. See, e.g., Monaghan, Making Sense of Overbreadth note 10, at 1-4; Marc Isserles, Overcoming Overbreadth: Facial Challenges and the Valid Rule Requirement, 48 AM. U. L. REV. 359, 386-95 (1998).
6. Schneider v. State, 308 U.S. 147, 164 (1939); Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., 452 U.S. 640, 648 (1981).
7. Eisgruber and Sager, The Vulnerability of Conscience, Schneider v. State note 5, at 1256.
8. All these examples are drawn from Supreme Court cases. For enumeration and discussion of the pertinent cases, see id. at 1284-91, 1302-04.