21 Pages Posted: 5 Jan 2012 Last revised: 25 Mar 2015
Date Written: December 7, 2011
It is sometimes alleged that Justice John Paul Stevens is hostile to religion. In fact, however, Justice Stevens espouses a position with religious roots and enthusiastically embraces a distinct conception of religion. This casts doubt on the claim, made in different ways by Eduardo Peñalver and Christopher Eisgruber, that the fundamental concern of his religion clause jurisprudence is equality. At least as important to him is protecting religion from corruption by the state.
Stevens’s position, in order to be consistent, ought to acknowledge, more forthrightly than he does, that it treats religion as a distinctive human good. Any notion of corruption implies a norm or ideal state from which the corruption is a falling off. An invocation of the corruption rationale presupposes that religion is a good thing deserving of protection. To call this view hostile to religion is confused to the point of perversity.
Keywords: Justice Stevens, Religious Enthusiast, hostile to religion
JEL Classification: K10. K19, K30, K39
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Koppelman, Andrew, Justice Stevens, Religious Enthusiast (December 7, 2011). 106 Northwestern University Law Review 567 (2012); Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 11-64. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1960095