Posted: 10 Feb 2008
The Court's proselytizing jurisprudence might seem relatively straightforward, as reflected in the Court's Village of Stratton opinion. Yet, the jurisprudence is far from clear when one factors into the analysis the Court's analyses in the ISKCON cases. This article examines the Court's proselytizing jurisprudence, suggesting that members of the Court seem to be of at least two minds both with respect to whether religious speech should simply be treated as any other form of protected speech and with respect to whether religious fundraising should be afforded robust constitutional protection. The article concludes that the ambivalence on these questions helps to explain what is currently a confused and confusing jurisprudence.
Keywords: proselytize, fundraising, ISKCON, religious speech
JEL Classification: J71, K10
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Strasser, Mark, Preaching, Fundraising, and the Constitution: On Proselytizing and the First Amendment. Denver University Law Review, Vol. 85, pp. 405-441, 2007. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1091524