skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

Conscience Wars: Complicity-Based Conscience Claims in Religion and Politics

The Yale law journal, 2015-05, Vol.124 (7), p.2516-2591

Copyright © 2015 The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc. ;COPYRIGHT 2015 Yale University, School of Law ;COPYRIGHT 2015 Yale University, School of Law ;Copyright Yale Law Journal Company, Inc. May 2015 ;ISSN: 0044-0094 ;EISSN: 1939-8611

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    Conscience Wars: Complicity-Based Conscience Claims in Religion and Politics
  • Author: NEJAIME, DOUGLAS ; SIEGEL, REVA B.
  • Subjects: Analysis ; Citizens ; Conflict ; Conscientious objection ; Conscientious objectors ; Democracy ; Exemption (Law) ; Exemptions ; Exemptions (Law) ; FEATURES ; Federal legislation ; Freedom of religion ; Harm principle (Ethics) ; Law ; Laws, regulations and rules ; Political protest ; Public accommodations ; Religion & politics ; Religion and politics ; Religious aspects ; Social aspects ; Studies ; Supreme Court decisions
  • Is Part Of: The Yale law journal, 2015-05, Vol.124 (7), p.2516-2591
  • Description: Persons of faith are now seeking religious exemptions from laws concerning sex, reproduction, and marriage on the ground that the law makes the objector complicit in the assertedly sinful conduct of others. We term claims of this kind, which were at issue in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, complicity-based conscience claims. Complicity-based conscience claims differ in form and in social logic from the claims featured in the free exercise cases that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) invokes. The distinctive features of complicity-based conscience claims matter, not because they make the claim for religious exemption any less authentic or sincere, but rather because accommodating claims of this kind has the potential to inflict material and dignitary harms on other citizens. Complicity claims focus on the conduct of others outside the faith community. Their accommodation therefore has potential to harm those whom the claimants view as sinning. Today complicity claims are asserted by growing numbers of Americans about contentious "culture war" issues. This dynamic amplifies the effects of accommodation. Faith claims that concern questions in democratic contest will escalate in number, and accommodation of the claims will be fraught with significance, not only for the claimants, but also for those whose conduct the claimants condemn. Some urge accommodation in the hopes of peaceful settlement, yet, as we show, complicity claims can provide an avenue to extend, rather than settle, conflict. We highlight the distinctive form and social logic of complicity-based conscience claims so that those debating accommodation do so with the impact on third parties fully in view. We show how concern about the third-party impact of accommodation structured the Court's decision in Hobby Lobby and demonstrate how this concern is an integral part of RFRA's compelling interest and narrow tailoring inquiries. At issue is not only whether but how complicity claims are accommodated.
  • Publisher: New Haven: The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 0044-0094
    EISSN: 1939-8611
  • Source: Freely Accessible Journals
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait