Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Two Concepts of Religious Liberty: The Natural Rights and Moral Autonomy Approaches to the Free Exercise of Religion

  • VINCENT PHILLIP MUÑOZ (a1)
Abstract

Due in part to the influence of Michael McConnell, free exercise exemptionism is generally thought to be compatible with, if not dictated by, the founders’ church-state political philosophy. This article rejects that position, arguing instead that America's constitutional tradition offers two distinct conceptions of religious liberty: the founders’ natural rights free exercise and modern moral autonomy exemptionism. The article aims to distinguish these two approaches by clarifying how they are grounded upon divergent philosophical understandings of human freedom and by explaining how they advance different views of what religious liberty is, how it is threatened, and, accordingly, how it is best protected. The article also attempts to demonstrate how our modern approach expands the protection for religious liberty in some ways but limits it in others.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Vincent Phillip Muñoz is Tocqueville Associate Professor of Political Science & Concurrent Associate Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame, 217 O'Shaughnessy Hall, Notre Dame, IN 46556 (vmunoz@nd.edu).
References
Hide All
Annals of the Congress of the United States, 1789–1834 . 1834–56. 42 vols. Washington, DC: Gales and Seaton.
Banning, Lance. 1995. The Sacred Fire of Liberty: James Madison and the Founding of the Federal Republic. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores . 2014. 573 U.S.
Bradley, Gerald V. 1991. “Beguiled: Free Exercise Exemptionism and the Siren Song of Liberalism.” Hofstra Law Review 20: 245319.
Braunfeld v. Brown . 1961. 366 U.S. 599.
Brutus. [1787] 2001. “NO. 2” In The Founders’ Constitution, eds. Kurland, Philip B. and Lerner, Ralph. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
City of Boerne v. Flores . 1997. 521 U.S. 507.
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah . 1993. 508 U.S. 520.
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith . 1990. 494 U.S. 872.
Galston, William A. 2002. Liberal Pluralism: The Implications of Value Pluralism for Political Theory and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Garvey, John H. 1996. “An Anti-Liberal Argument for Religious Freedom,” Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues 7: 275–91.
Gaustad, Edwin S., ed. 1993. A Documentary History of Religion in America to the Civil War, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Hamburger, Philip. 1992. “A Constitutional Right of Religious Exemptions: An Historical Perspective.” George Washington Law Review 60: 915–48.
Hamburger, Philip. 1993. “Natural Rights, Natural Law, and American Constitutions.” Yale Law Journal 102: 907–60.
Hamburger, Philip. 2004. “More is Less.” Virginia Law Review 90: 835–92.
Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission . 2012. 565 U.S. ___.
Jefferson, Thomas. 1984. Thomas Jefferson: Writings, ed. Peterson, Merrill D.. New York: The Library of America.
Jones v. Opelika . 1942. 316 U.S. 584.
Kessler, Sanford. 1983. “Locke's Influence on Jefferson's ‘Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom.’Journal of Church and State 25 (2): 231–52.
Koppelman, Andrew. 2013. Defending Religious Neutrality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kurland, Philip B., and Lerner, Ralph, eds. 2001. The Founders’ Constitution. 5 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund [originally published: Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1987].
Laycock, Douglas. 1990. “Formal, Substantive, and Disaggregated Neutrality Toward Religion.” DePaul Law Review 39: 9931022.
Laycock, Douglas. 1996a. “Continuity and Change in the Threat of Religious Liberty: The Reformation Era and the Late Twentieth Century.” Minnesota Law Review 80: 1047–102.
Laycock, Douglas. 1996b. “Religious Liberty as Liberty.” Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues 7: 313–56.
Laycock, Douglas. 2007. “Substantive Neutrality Revisited.” West Virginia Law Review 110: 5188.
Leiter, Brian 2013. Why Tolerate Religion? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Locke, John [1689] 1983. A Letter Concerning Toleration, ed. Tully, James H.. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Locke, John. [1689] 2010. Two Treatises on Government, ed. Laslett, Peter. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Maclure, Jocelyn, and Taylor, Charles. 2011. Secularism and Freedom of Conscience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Madison, James. 1865. Letters and Other Writings of James Madison, 4 vols. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co.
Madison, James. 1900. The Writings of James Madison, ed. Hunt, Gaillard. 9 vols. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.
Madison, James. 1981. The Mind of the Founder: Sources of the Political Thought of James Madison, ed. Meyers, Marvin. Rev. ed. Hanover and London: Brandeis University Press.
Madison, James. 1984. The Papers of James Madison. Presidential Series, ed. Stagg, J.C.A. et al. 6 vols. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
Mansfield, Harvey C. Jr. 1993. “Responsibility Versus Self-Expression.” In Old Rights and New, ed. Licht, Robert A.. Washington, DC: The AEI Press, 96111.
McConnell, Michael W. 1990a. “The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion.” Harvard Law Review 103 (7): 1409–517.
McConnell, Michael W. 1990b. “Free Exercise Revisionism and the Smith Decision.” University of Chicago Law Review 57 (4): 1109–53.
McConnell, Michael W. 1992. “Accommodation of Religion: An Update and a Response to the Critics.” George Washington Law Review 60: 685742.
McConnell, Terrance. 2000. Inalienable Rights: The Limits of Consent in Medicine and Law. New York: Oxford University Press.
Muñoz, Vincent Phillip. 2008. “The Original Meaning of the Free Exercise Clause: The Evidence from the First Congress.” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 31 (3): 1083–120.
Munñoz, Vincent Phillip. 2009. God and the Founders: Madison, Washington, and Jefferson. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Muñoz, Vincent Phillip. 2015. “Church and State in the Founding-Era States.” American Political Thought 4: 138.
NAACP v. Button . 1963. 371 U.S. 415.
Nussbaum, Martha. 2008. Liberty of Conscience: In Defense of America's Tradition of Religious Equality. New York: Basic Books.
Poore, Benjamin Perley, ed. 1878. The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey . 1992. 505 U.S. 833.
Rawls, John. 1993. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Reynolds v. United States . 1879. 98 U.S. 145.
Rienzi, Mark L. 2012. “Religious Liberty 9, President Obama 0,” National Catholic Register, January 12. http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/religious-liberty-9-president-obama-0/ (May 14, 2014).
Rosen, Gary. 1999. American Compact: James Madison and the Problem of Founding. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
Sandoz, Ellis, ed. 1990. Political Sermons of the American Founding Era, 1730–1805. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
Schwartzman, Micah. 2012. “What If Religion Is Not Special?University of Chicago Law Review 79: 1351–427.
Seagrave, S. Adam. 2014. The Foundations of Natural Morality: On the Compatibility of Natural Rights and the Natural Law. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Sherbert v. Verner . 1963. 374 U.S. 398.
Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division , 1981. 450 U.S. 707.
Tollefsen, Christopher. 2012. “Conscience, Religion, and the State.” In Challenges to Religious Liberty in the Twenty-First Century, ed. Bradley, Gerard V.. New York: Cambridge University Press, 111–35.
United States v. Seeger . 1965. 380 U.S. 163.
Universal Military Training and Service Act. 1948.
Washington, George. 1988. George Washington: A Collection, ed. Allen, William B.. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
Weiss, Jillian T. 2010. “The First Amendment Right to Free Exercise of Religion, Nondiscrimination Statutes Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, and the Free Exercise Claims of Non-Church-Related Employees.” Florida Coastal Law Review 12: 1546.
Welsh v. United States . 1970. 398 U.S. 333.
West, Ellis M. 1993–94. “The Right to Religion-Based Exemptions in Early America: The Case of Conscientious Objectors to Conscription.” Journal of Law and Religion 10 (2): 367401.
Wisconsin v. Yoder . 1971. 406 U.S. 205.
Wolfe, Christopher. 2012. “Free Exercise, Religious Conscience, and the Common Good.” In Challenges to Religious Liberty in the Twenty-First Century, ed. Bradley, Gerard V.. New York: Cambridge University Press, 93110.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed