E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Many are observing how conflicts over state RFRAs – most notably in Indiana and Arkansas – are now bound up in broader culture war conflicts over same-sex marriage and LGBT equality. Arguments for religious exemption being asserted in support of state RFRAs, as well as claims to exemption from the ACA's contraceptive coverage requirements, have emerged as part of a cross-denominational movement that has made religious liberty a new rallying cry. The New York Times yesterday connected the current round of claims to the 2009 Manhattan Declaration, the product of a political coalition between Catholic and evangelical Protestant leaders. Our article, Conscience Wars: Complicity-Based Conscience Claims in Religion and Politics, coming out soon in the Yale Law Journal and available here, extensively situates today's religious exemption claims in this cross-denominational mobilization.Finding even earlier origins, we trace today’s complicity-based conscience claims to the proliferation of healthcare refusals legislation in the 1990s and 2000s—legislation supported by Catholics and evangelical Protestants opposed to abortion, and increasingly contraception. With this longer view, we can see how religious liberty arguments allow social conservative advocates and religious leaders to shift from speaking as a majority seeking to enforce traditional morality through generally applicable laws to speaking as a minority seeking exemptions from laws that contravene traditional morality.When unable to entrench traditional morality through outright bans on abortion and same-sex marriage, advocates turn to arguments for religious liberty—and particularly claims based on complicity—to create a web of exemptions from laws that depart from traditional morality.