Here is the “Professors Panel” (video and audio) from the joint Journal of Catholic Legal Studies and Center for Law and Religion symposium on the history and future of Catholic legal education. Our panelists were Professors Angela Carmella, Teresa Collett, Richard Garnett, Jeffrey Pojanowski, and Amy Uelman. It was a pleasure to host this conference on the forthcoming book on the subject by Professors John Breen and Lee Strang.
On February 14, 2020, the Journal of Catholic Legal Studies and the Center for Law and Religion co-hosted a conference on a forthcoming book by Professors John Breen (Loyala University Chicago) and Lee Strang (University of Toledo), “A Light Unseen: A History of Catholic Legal Education.” The symposium consisted of a “Deans Panel” and a “Professors Panel.”
Here is the audio of the Deans Panel, featuring very interesting commentary on the state and future of Catholic legal education from Deans Kathleen Boozang (Seton Hall), Marcus Cole (Notre Dame), Vincent Rougeau (Boston College), Michael Simons (St. John’s), William Treanor (Georgetown), and Robert Vischer (St. Thomas).
Occasioned by the Court’s decision last weekend in the South Bay United Pentecostal Church case, over at the Volokh Conspiracy. I note that neither the Chief Justice nor Justice Kavanaugh bothers to cite Employment Division v. Smith, the central case in the area, and wonder how much doctrine drives decisions:
For both the Chief and Justice Kanavaugh, then, the case came down to judgments about which activities are “comparable” and about how much deference to give elected officials during a public-health emergency. For what it’s worth, I think the Chief had the better of the argument. But the point I’d like to focus on is this: both the Chief and Justice Kavanaugh made these judgments quickly on the basis of broad principles and common-sense assumptions. I have already noted how neither of them even referred to Smith, the controlling case in this area. No doubt, the need to decide this interlocutory application speedily precluded a more thorough legal analysis. But these opinions make one wonder whether the doctrinal superstructure of free exercise clause jurisprudence, which students, professors, and lawyers pore over with great care, has all that much importance, in the end. Perhaps free exercise cases always come down to quick, intuitive judgments—however judges explain their decisions after the fact.
You can read the whole post here.
I had a wonderful time this morning, teaching a (virtual!) class at Lomonosov Moscow State University on the COVID epidemic and religious exemptions under the US Constitution. Thanks to Professor Gayane Davidyan for inviting me and to her students for their wonderful, thoughtful questions. Lomonsov will post the class on YouTube soon, and I’ll link it when it appears.
Professor Mark David Hall has this review of The Cambridge Companion to the First Amendment and Religious Liberty, edited by Professors Michael Breidenbach and Owen Anderson. I was pleased to contribute a chapter to the book.
All copyrights for this article are reserved to this source