This Essay responds to some major critiques of my work on the religion clauses. The effort has seemed worth undertaking because many issues the critics raise lie at the core of one's approach to free exercise and nonestablishment, and some of those issues matter greatly for constitutional adjudication more broadly. Like any author, perhaps, my reaction to reading some comments has been that I did not quite say that, but I shall not bore you with these quibbles about how well I explained myself in the past. Rather, I shall try to confront the genuinely basic questions that many of the comments raise. My aim is less to persuade the reader that my positions are right, or better than alternatives, than to explain what the positions are and why I hold them.
Fundamental Questions About the Religion Clauses: Reflections on Some Critiques,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol47/iss4/14