Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Regulating ReligionThe Courts and the Free Exercise Clause$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Catharine Cookson

Print publication date: 2001

Print ISBN-13: 9780195129441

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2003

DOI: 10.1093/019512944X.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 19 September 2021

Casuistical Free Exercise Jurisprudence

Casuistical Free Exercise Jurisprudence

A Summary and Some Conclusions

Chapter:
(p.186) 8 Casuistical Free Exercise Jurisprudence
Source:
Regulating Religion
Author(s):

Catharine Cookson

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/019512944X.003.0009

Perceptions of authoritarian injustice or of anarchical laxity are just as harmful to the integrity of the justice system as actual impropriety. Casuistry offers clear, definable paradigmatic limits to the free exercise right, and places the burden of proof on both the state and the religious adherent. This book proposes that a casuistical free exercise analysis, while not perfect, protects the courts’ integrity by offering a fairer and more just process for resolving the conflict of principles that lies at the heart of free exercise cases. To those who would reject casuistry as a new element without precedent, and as an arbitrary choice without any foundation or authority, the book notes that casuistry is quintessentially the process used in common law decision making, and actually has been used in deciding a significant number of major free exercise cases by the U.S. Supreme Court. What casuistry requires of the courts is a searching scrutiny with discernment and a willingness to make, explain, and justify these decisions to a fearful public and to a faithful “people of the wilderness.”

Keywords:   anarchical laxity, authoritarian injustice, common law, conflict of principles, decision making, discernment, integrity of the justice system, searching scrutiny

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .