Questioning Strict Separationism in Unsettled Times: Rethinking the Strict Separation of Church and State in United States Constitutional Law

Abstract

Contemporary case law in the United States surrounding the establishment clause of the federal Constitution has entered a period of remarkable uncertainty. Now is an appropriate time to revisit the legal foundations of the Supreme Court’s seminal cases of Everson v. Board of Education (1947) and McCollum v. Board of Education (1948). These cases initiated the Court’s strict separationist construction of the establishment clause. In response to critics who see these cases as without judicial warrant, I argue that the holdings rest on a particular form of substantive due process. Further, I defend the methodology the Court deploys in these cases. Recognizing the legal foundations of Everson and McCollum and the tenability of the method the Court deploys in these cases improves our understanding of important Supreme Court case law. However, it also highlights new lines of critique of the Court’s strict separationist jurisprudence—a conclusion especially relevant today, given the Court’s willingness to revise long-standing precedents.

Keywords

• church and state
• establishment clause
• <i>Everson</i>
• <i>McCollum</i>
• separationism
• accommodationism