First, those religious groupings that both today and historically have been regarded as outsiders or minorities, such as Jews, Muslims, Native Americans, and various others (including Jehovah’s Witnesses and Christian Scientists), did not succeed or fail in making religious liberty claims at a rate (controlling for all other variables) that was significantly different than for other religious classifications. In sum, with the potential exception of Muslim claimants in certain claim subcategories, religious minorities did not experience disproportionately unfavorable treatments in the federal courts of the 1980s and 1990s.
Second, two categories of religious affiliation by claimants emerged as consistently and significantly associated with a negative outcome—Catholic (at the 99% probability level) and Baptist (at the 95% probability level).
The question remains why those whose religious views are within the mainstream of American society would be significantly less likely to succeed in obtaining a court-ordered accommodation of religious practices. I’ll examine several possible answers to that question, beginning tomorrow.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
How Various Religions Fare In Court Challenges
At The Volokh Conspiracy, Prof. Greg Sisk (who is a regular at Mirror of Justice) is blogging all this week about his empirical research on how various religious denominations fare in free exercise challenges in the courts. Here is some of what he said in his first posting yesterday (which also contains links to the full studies):