Two Words: Why Frank Ravitch No Longer Supports the Overturning of Employment Division v. Smith

In its landmark 1990 decision Employment Division v. Smith, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause does not require religious exemptions to neutral and generally applicable laws, even if those laws incidentally burden religious practice. Over the years, Smith has been criticized for its insensitivity and harm to religious needs and rights, particularly those of religious minorities. Frank S. Ravitch (Michigan State University College of Law) explains why he no longer supports the overturning of Smith.

(more…)

Continue Reading Two Words: Why Frank Ravitch No Longer Supports the Overturning of Employment Division v. Smith

Religious Freedom and Indigenous Rights: Global Perspectives

The Klamath River, which is of great historical and spiritual significance for the Yurok Tribe, flows through Oregon and Northern California (Photo: Istock).

This series provides comparative interdisciplinary analysis of indigenous spirituality and the legal challenges involved in its protection on national and international levels. Drawing on a variety of cases from the Americas, South Africa, and Australia, contributors discuss specificities of indigenous spirituality and theology, power dynamics behind the discussion of indigenous rights, the sacredness of natural objects for indigenous groups, the insufficiency of protections for indigenous believers within existing religious-freedom frameworks, and legal steps needed to strengthen these protections. This series is based on presentations given at the ICLRS 32nd Annual International Law and Religion Symposium, 6–7 October 2025.

(more…)

Continue Reading Religious Freedom and Indigenous Rights: Global Perspectives

Three Observations on the Catholic Charter School Case

Frederick Mark Gedicks is emeritus professor of law at the J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently affirmed, by a four-to-four vote, a decision by the Oklahoma Supreme Court that the state could not fund a Catholic virtual charter school because this would violate anti-establishment provisions of the Oklahoma Constitution and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Drummond ex rel. State v. Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board, 2024 OK 53, 558 P.3d 1 (6–2 dec.), aff’d by equally divided ct., Nos. 24-394 & -396 (U.S. May 22, 2025) (per curiam), 2025 WL 1459364. (Paragraph numbers below correspond to the official report of the Oklahoma Supreme Court.)

(more…)

Continue Reading Three Observations on the Catholic Charter School Case