Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=912530
 


 



Lemon Lives


Daniel O. Conkle


Indiana University Maurer School of Law


Case Western Reserve Law Review, Symposium on Religion and the Public Schools After Lee v. Weisman, Vol. 43, pp. 865-82, 1993
Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper

Abstract:     
This article responds to an article by Professor Michael Stokes Paulsen, entitled "Lemon Is Dead," in which Paulsen interprets the Supreme Court's decision in Lee v. Weisman to repudiate the Establishment Clause test of Lemon v. Kurtzman and to replace it with a test that limits the Clause to cases involving direct or indirect coercion. The article disputes Paulsen's interpretation of Weisman, and it also disputes his normative argument in support of the coercion approach. It contends that Lemon survives Weisman, and that Lemon's multi-faceted and context-specific approach, however vague, is preferable to a test that focuses exclusively on the problem of coercion.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 18

Keywords: Constitutional Law, Establishment Clause, Religious Liberty

JEL Classification: K00, K10, K19, K30, K39

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: June 28, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Conkle, Daniel O., Lemon Lives. Case Western Reserve Law Review, Symposium on Religion and the Public Schools After Lee v. Weisman, Vol. 43, pp. 865-82, 1993; Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=912530

Contact Information

Daniel O. Conkle (Contact Author)
Indiana University Maurer School of Law ( email )
211 S. Indiana Avenue
Bloomington, IN 47405
United States
(812) 855-4331 (Phone)
(812) 855-0555 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 587
Downloads: 48

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.235 seconds