THE RELIGION CLAUSES

A dispassionate exposition in favor of the separation of church and state.

Noting that the current structure of the Supreme Court is tilted toward an accommodationist view of the First Amendment, which tends to side with conservatives and religious majorities, legal experts Chemerinsky and Gillman take the initiative to offer a differing view. “Our thesis,” they write, “is that the Constitution meant to create, and should be interpreted as creating, a secular republic, meaning that the government has no role in ad­vancing religion and that religious belief and practice should be a pri­vate matter.” The authors begin with an examination of how the framers of the Constitution viewed the relationship between church and state. Despite traditions to the contrary, they write, “the framers resisted strong pressure to declare that the American republic would formally be associated with Christianity. There is no doubt that they intended to create a government that was formally secular.” Though declaring themselves not to be “originalists,” the authors work from the assumption that the founders sought specifically to create a secular government and that such a government has served America best through time. They work systematically, first through the Establishment Clause and then the Free Exercise Clause, explaining the background to each clause and various court cases that have shaped the public understanding of them, before then examining their own separationist views regarding each. Chemerinsky and Gillman end with a counter to the argument that separation of church and state is often a guise for hostility to religion; instead, they write, separation is a means of protecting all religions. Written in what can best be described as a relaxed legal style, the book is largely accessible but will appeal most to attorneys and those intrigued by the Constitution and the Supreme Court.

A well-argued book geared toward those with an interest in the intersection of law and religion.