Happy New Year 2024!

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2024! 

I hope that you continue to find Religion Clause a valuable source of information on the intersection of law, religion and public policy. 

As many commentators have pointed out, the Internet has changed dramatically over the last two decades.  Long-form blog posts have become a less popular form of online communication. Videos and podcasts have supplanted blogs in many areas.  However, if one can be an online troglodyte, I must plead guilty. Religion Clause has always been a niche blog which has particularly attracted lawyers, social scientists, advocacy organization personnel, law school faculty, journalists, clergy, legislative and executive branch staff, students and others working professionally or avocationally interested in church-state relations and religious liberty issues.  I invite your feedback on the continued effectiveness of the current format.

Access to Religion Clause posts is also available through e-mail subscriptions, through X (formerly known as Twitter) and through Facebook, though the format, accompanying advertising, and availability of posts through these channels are handled by third parties over whom I have no control.

During 2023, two issues from past years continued to play out at length-- abortion rights and religious exemptions from health care mandates.  Two other issues, while hardly new, seemed to have particular salience this past year-- increasing antisemitism and issues of gender identity.

In reporting on these and other developments, I have attempted to retain Religion Clause's objectivity and its policy of linking to extensive primary source material. I hope that the blog continues to have a reputation for reliability at a time when the objectivity of social media is increasingly called into question.

I also urge you to look at the blog's Sidebar which has dozens of links to useful sites. Scroll down and you will also find resources to subscribe for e-mails giving you access to the latest posts, and access to the X (Twitter) account.

Thank you to all who are loyal readers of Religion Clause-- both those who have followed it for many years and those who have only recently discovered it. I hope you will continue to follow Religion Clause in 2024. Please recommend the blog to colleagues, students and friends who may find it useful and interesting.

Best wishes as we all face the challenges of an increasingly fractured world in 2024.  Many of you who are readers of Religion Clause are also influencers who are playing important roles in dealing with the many issues facing us.  I hope that Religion Clause can play a small part in giving you background to inform your efforts.

To all my readers, feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year with comments or suggestions.

Howard Friedman                      

Publication Schedule

From January 9 to 22, posts on Religion Clause will be more sporadic than usual. The regular publication schedule will resume on January 23.

Happy New Year 2023!

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2023! I hope that you continue to find Religion Clause a valuable source of information on the intersection of law, religion and public policy. In this past year, we have seen important First Amendment doctrinal developments. Free exercise concerns have loomed larger in the view of the Supreme Court and the Establishment Clause has become a weaker limit on governmental actions. Cases which on their surface were not religion cases have nevertheless sharpened cultural and political divisions along religious lines.  And antisemitism has become a growing concern.

In reporting on these and other developments, I have attempted to retain Religion Clause's objectivity and its policy of linking to extensive primary source material. I hope that the blog continues to have a reputation for reliability at a time when the objectivity of social media is increasingly called into question.  

Religion Clause is a niche blog whose readership includes lawyers, social scientists, advocacy organization personnel, law school faculty, journalists, clergy, legislative and executive branch staff, students and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns in the U.S. and around the world. I attempt to avoid excessively technical matters in my posts in order to make the blog accessible as well to non-lawyers with a general interest in the area.

Thank you to all of you who are loyal readers of Religion Clause-- both those who have followed it for years and those who have only recently discovered it. I hope you will continue to follow Religion Clause in 2023. Please recommend the blog to colleagues, students and friends who may find it useful and interesting.

Best wishes as we all face the challenges that 2023 brings to us.  I hope that we are able to deal with these challenges by respecting divergent viewpoints and coming together with solutions to at least some of the many problems that we face.

Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year with comments or suggestions. Best wishes for 2023.

Howard Friedman

Happy New Year 2022!

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2022! I hope that you continue to find Religion Clause a valuable source of information on the intersection of law, religion and public policy.  This past year, we saw a continuation of the trend to convert cultural and political disagreements with legislative or executive decisions into religious freedom or church-state claims that can be asserted before the courts.  Faced with this deluge, the Supreme Court's increased use of its "shadow docket" to decide important free exercise cases without full briefing and argument has become the subject of controversy.

In reporting on these and other developments, I have attempted to retain Religion Clause's objectivity and its policy of linking to extensive primary source material. I hope that the blog continues to have a reputation for reliability at a time when the objectivity of social media is increasingly called into question.  

Religion Clause is a niche blog whose readership includes lawyers at advocacy organizations, law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, students and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns in the U.S. and around the world. I attempt to avoid excessive technical matters in my posts in order to make the blog accessible as well to non-lawyers with a general interest in the area.

2022 promises to be another year of interesting and important developments. I hope you will continue to follow them on Religion Clause.  In addition to accessing the blog directly, links to Religion Clause postings are available on Twitter, Facebook and through e-mail alerts from services listed near the bottom of the blog's sidebar.

Thanks again to all of you who are loyal readers-- both those who have followed Religion Clause for years and those of you who have only recently discovered the blog.  A special thanks to readers who have quickly sent me leads on recent developments, and to those who have alerted me to mistakes. I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues, students and friends who might find it of interest.

Best wishes as we all face the challenges that 2022 brings to us.  I hope that we are able to deal with these challenges by respecting divergent viewpoints and supporting the foundational institutions of American democracy.

Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year with comments or suggestions. Best wishes for 2022.

Howard Friedman

NOTE TO READERS USING FEEDBURNER E-MAIL SERVICE

Google, the sponsor of Feedburner, has announced that the Feedburner e-mail service will no longer be available after July 2021. If you are currently following Religion Clause through a daily e-mail from Feedburner -- the address you receive it from is feedproxy@google.com -- you may wish to select an alternative platform for following this blog. You can subscribe to alternative e-mail feeds through "Follow.it" or "FeedBlitz".  Just scroll down near the bottom of the Sidebar of the blog to subscribe to one of these.

NOTE TO READERS USING FEEDBURNER E-MAIL SERVICE

Google, the sponsor of Feedburner, has announced that the Feedburner e-mail service will no longer be available after July 2021. If you are currently following Religion Clause through a daily e-mail from feedproxy@google.com, you may wish to select an alternative platform for following this blog. You can find alternatives near the bottom of the Sidebar of the blog. This does not affect those who access Religion Clause in other ways (including FeedBlitz).

Happy New Year 2021!

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2021! I hope you find Religion Clause a valuable resource in following the intersection of religion with law and politics. At a time in which factual accuracy is increasingly the victim of ideology, I hope that Religion Clause has built a reputation for reliability.  I strive for objectivity in my posts, and provide extensive links to the primary sources underlying each post for those who wish to fact check or explore more deeply the developments I highlight.

I am pleased that my regular readers span the political and religious spectrum and include law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, students and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns in the U.S. and around the world.

We have all endured one of the most trying years in our lives because of the unprecedented Coronavirus pandemic.  Perhaps surprisingly, the earliest pandemic-related litigation has been dominated by religious liberty disputes.  Governors and courts have been placed in the uncomfortable position of having to decide, for example, whether congregate prayer is as essential as in-person grocery shopping. The coming months may see another round of religious liberty litigation surrounding the roll-out of COVID vaccines if, as seems likely, employers, airlines, schools and others begin to mandate vaccinations.

2021 brings a reconstituted Supreme Court and a new Administration which face ongoing as well as newly-developing religious liberty controversies.  In the past year, many of the most highly charged issues that divide our country politically have continued to divide it along religious lines.  This reality creates difficult challenges for the Supreme Court as well as for the other branches of government.

All of this illustrates the saliency of religion in life, law and politics in the U.S. and around the world. Religion Clause will continue to cover all the legal developments in these areas.  

Thanks again to all of you who are loyal readers-- both those who have followed Religion Clause for years and those of you who have only recently discovered the blog.  A special thanks to readers who have quickly sent me leads on recent developments, and to those who have alerted me to mistakes. All of you have made Religion Clause the most recognized and reliable source for keeping informed on the intersection of religion with law and politics. I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues, students and friends who might find it of interest.

I also remind you that the Religion Clause sidebar contains links to a wealth of resources.  Please e-mail me if you discover broken links or if there are other links that I should consider adding.

Best wishes as you face the challenges that 2021 brings to us!  Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year with comments or suggestions.

May you have a healthy 2021,

Howard Friedman

Happy New Year 2020 !

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2020! I hope you continue to find Religion Clause an important resource for news on religious liberty and church-state developments. I continue to strive for objectivity in my posts and to provide links to an abundance of primary source material underlying each post. I am pleased that my regular readers span the political and religious spectrum and include a large number of law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, students and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns in the U.S. and around the world.

As we usher in 2020, it has become conventional wisdom that many of the most highly charged issues that divide our country politically also often divide it along religious lines.  Whether the issue is abortion, transgender rights, immigration, same-sex marriage, climate change, or campus free speech, activists have increasingly defined the debate in religious terms. As I watch this, I recall the words of Chief Justice Burger nearly 50 years ago in Lemon v. Kurtzman:

Ordinarily political debate and division, however vigorous or even partisan, are normal and healthy manifestations of our democratic system of government, but political division along religious lines was one of the principal evils against which the First Amendment was intended to protect.

2019 has also been a year in which religious intolerance has grown.  Increasing anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world remind us that this age-old manifestation of hate has not disappeared. Anti-Muslim attitudes and actions continue largely unabated in numerous countries, while minority Christian communities elsewhere are under siege.  2020 promises to be an important year for confronting religious liberty and church-state concerns.  Religion Clause will continue to cover all the developments.

Thanks again to all of you who are loyal readers-- both those who have followed Religion Clause for years and those of you who have only recently discovered the blog.  A special thanks to readers who have quickly sent me leads on recent developments, and to those who have alerted me to mistakes. All of you have made Religion Clause the most recognized and reliable source for keeping informed on the intersection of religion with law and politics. I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues, students and friends who might find it of interest.

I also remind you that the Religion Clause sidebar contains links to a wealth of resources.  Please e-mail me if you discover broken links or if there are other links that I should consider adding.

Best wishes for 2020!  Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year with comments or suggestions.

Howard Friedman

NOTE TO READERS: RELIGION CLAUSE WILL BE ON BREAK FROM OCT. 21 TO NOV. 3

Religion Clause will be on break from Oct. 21 to Nov. 3.  Look for regular postings to resume on November 4.

Happy New Year 2019

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2019! I hope you continue to find Religion Clause an important resource for news on religious liberty and church-state developments. I continue to strive for objectivity in my posts and to provide links to an abundance of primary source material underlying each post.  I am pleased that my regular readers span the political and religious spectrum and include a large number of law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, students and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns in the U.S. and around the world.

It has been a year in which some of the most highly charged church-state and religious liberty issues have been a bit defused by judicial and administrative decisions.  However, challenges to many of those administrative regulations are still working their way through the courts.  Similarly a number of the questions which courts have avoided through narrow decisions will inevitably arise again in the coming years.  Also this past year, a number of judicial and legislative developments abroad have continued to reflect interesting approaches to religious liberty concerns.

Thanks again to all of you who are loyal readers-- both those who have followed Religion Clause for years and those of you who have only recently discovered the blog.  A special thanks to readers who have quickly sent me leads on recent developments, and to those who have alerted me to mistakes. All of you have made Religion Clause the most recognized and reliable source for keeping informed on the intersection of religion with law and politics. I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues, students and friends who might find it of interest.  I particularly renew this request this year because, for reasons inexplicable to me, there has been a fall off of page views during the last quarter of 2018 as recorded by the counters I use.  Religion Clause is accessible via Twitter and Facebook, as well as through traditional online access and RSS feeds.

I also remind you that the Religion Clause sidebar contains links to a wealth of resources.  Please e-mail me if you discover broken links or if there are other links that I should consider adding.

Best wishes for 2019!  Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year with comments or suggestions.

Howard M. Friedman

NOTE TO READERS: RELIGION CLAUSE WILL BE ON A PUBLICATION BREAK

There will be sporadic or no postings on Religion Clause Blog between May 19 and June 4.  Look for Religion Clause to return with regular postings beginning June 5.

Happy New Year 2018!

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2018! I hope you continue to find Religion Clause an important resource for news on religious liberty and church-state developments. I continue to strive for objectivity in my posts and to provide links to an abundance of primary source material underlying each post.  I am pleased that my regular readers span the political and religious spectrum and include a large number of law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, students and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns in the U.S. and around the world.

It has been a chaotic year in which lines between law and politics, news and opinion, religion and culture have all become increasingly blurred.  In such times, access to a wide spectrum of factual information is of increased importance.

Thanks again to all of you who are loyal readers-- both those who have followed Religion Clause for years and those of you who have only recently discovered the blog.  A special thanks to readers who have quickly sent me leads on recent developments, and to those who have alerted me to mistakes. All of you have made Religion Clause the most recognized and reliable source for keeping informed on the intersection of religion with law and politics. The ABA Journal continues to include Religion Clause as one of 55 legal blogs in its Blawg 100 Hall of Fame.  I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues, students and friends who might find it of interest.  It is accessible via Twitter and Facebook, as well as through traditional online access and RSS feeds.

I also remind you that the Religion Clause sidebar contains links to a wealth of resources.  Please e-mail me if you discover broken links or if there are other links that I should consider adding.

Best wishes for 2018!  Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year with comments or suggestions.

Howard M. Friedman

Religion Clause To Take A Publication Break

Dear Readers:

Religion Clause will be going on a publication break until approximately the end of March.  Check back for my resumption of postings at that time.

Howard Friedman

Happy New Year 2017 !

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2017! I hope you continue to find Religion Clause a useful, if not indispensable, source of news on religious liberty and church-state developments.  While I focus primarily on developments in the United States, I have increased my coverage of international law-and-religion issues that are of special interest.

In a year in which distrust of media outlets and concerns over "fake" news reports have gained prominence, I hope I have remained reliably objective in my posts and have provided links to an abundance of primary source material for your use in fleshing out your understanding of developments.  I am pleased that my regular readers span the political and religious spectrum and include a large number of law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns.

Last year was a year of surprises-- not the least of which were the untimely death of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States.  Both of these will significantly impact church-state and religious liberty developments in 2017.

The aphorism "Predictions are very difficult, particularly if they are about the future" has variously been ascribed to Neils Bohr, Yogi Berra and others.  Well here is my difficult, and some might say foolhardy, prediction for 2017.  The year has the potential of bringing seismic developments in the church-state and religious liberty arenas.  There are three areas to watch.

First, religious liberty claims are increasingly seen as part of the "culture wars"-- a religious, social and political divide that became more salient with the election of Donald Trump.  A fundamental issue that is likely to pervade a number of specific disputes this year is how to distinguish a "religious" claim that enjoys special legal protection from a cultural claim that is subject to the will of political majorities.

Second, the added wall of separation provided by Blaine Amendments in numerous state constitutions is under challenge in the Supreme Court in the Trinity Lutheran case.  This challenge coincides with Donald Trump's designation as Secretary of Education of an individual who is a vigorous proponent of school choice.  In recent years, Blaine Amendments have been a primary stumbling block for school vouchers and similar plans.

Third, during the campaign, Donald Trump promised evangelical audiences that repeal of the Johnson Amendment was high on his agenda.  Repeal would mean that houses of worship could actively participate in political campaigns and still keep their non-profit status.  The revolution in campaign financing resulting from on-line fundraising from millions of supporters that was finely tuned in the 2016 elections could be supplemented by the raising of what would effectively be tax-deductible campaign funds to finance electioneering by religious organizations.

Continue to read Religion Clause to find out if developments bear out any of my speculative suggestions.  I also remind you that the Religion Clause sidebar contains links to a wealth of resources.  Please e-mail me if you discover broken links or if there are other links that I should consider adding.

Thanks to all of you who are loyal readers-- both those who have followed Religion Clause for years and those of you who have only recently discovered the blog.  Thank you for making Religion Clause the most recognized source for keeping informed on the intersection of religion with law and politics.  I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues and friends who might find it of interest.  It is accessible via Twitter and Facebook, as well as through traditional online access and RSS feeds.

Best wishes for 2017!  Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) in response to this post or throughout the year.

Howard M. Friedman

Religion Clause Feed On Social Media Is Back

To Readers Who Follow Religion Clause on Twitter, Facebook or Google+--

I discovered only today that the company providing automatic posting of Religion Clause feed to various social media sites closed its doors on Nov. 1 without sending me notice. (I guess that's what happens when one uses free online providers :).)  I now have a new provider so that Religion Clause is back on social media.

Interview On State of Church-State Relations

For readers who may be interested, Christianity Today's Church Law & Tax today published an interview with me titled Q&A: The Current State of Church-State Relations.

Note To Readers: Comment Feature Disabled

This summer, Religion Clause has been inundated with Comments from spammers, and to a lesser extent, from trollers.  Therefore I have joined the trend among serious websites and have reluctantly disabled the Comment feature on this blog.  I invite readers who have corrections or fairness concerns relating to any post to communicate with me by e-mail at the link in the sidebar, or via Twitter.  And I thank those readers who have in the past posted serious and substantive comments.--- HMF

Religion Clause Blog Gets Press Coverage

Religion Clause blog received press coverage today in the Detroit Legal News in an article titled Faith and light: Professor's blog helps keep 'church-state' debate alive.

Happy New Year 2016 !

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2016!  It is difficult to believe that I have been blogging on Religion Clause for over ten years, and have posted over 18,000 stories.  As I have been reminded, this means that for those who rely on Religion Clause as a resource, there are many who do not remember the time when there was not a central source for keeping current on church-state and religious liberty developments.

Last year was important.  Issues surrounding same-sex marriage and responses to it riveted the attention of much of the U.S. population.  The challenge by religious non-profits to the Obamacare regulations on contraceptive coverage brought to the fore the question of whether courts must give complete deference to assertions by individuals and groups that their religious exercise has been substantially burdened.  The Supreme Court gave unusual attention to civil rights claims by prisoners, including their religious freedom claims.  Increasing concern about ISIS-inspired terrorism tempted some-- including some seeking the highest office in the land-- to question whether America's traditional welcome to all religious believers (and non-believers) is as firmly established as we had once believed.

Religion Clause has attempted to provide the raw materials-- as objectively as possible-- so that readers can make informed judgments on the difficult policy decisions facing us.  And I have continued to cover parallel issues arising outside the United States in order to give additional perspective.

2016 promises to be an equally challenging year.  Many of the high profile issues of last year will remain with us.  In addition there will likely be some new ones.  How will religion factor into the Presidential race?  What are the implications of establishment clause and free exercise clashes being increasingly handled by well-funded advocacy groups that are repeat players before the courts, legislatures and local government officials?  Will transgender rights be the next battle in the culture wars that will become a religious as well as a civil rights issue?

And then there is often a "sleeper"-- an issue that becomes unexpectedly dominant.  My nomination for that in 2016 is the question of whether the retirement plans of many religiously-affiliated healthcare organizations will, as the 3rd Circuit recently held, be found not to qualify for the "church plan" exemption from ERISA on which they have relied.  Many of these plans will be underfunded by tens or hundreds of millions of dollars if they are required to comply with ERISA.  What kind of financial risk will that pose to them?  Many of these healthcare organizations have complicated relationships with a diocese or other church body of their denomination.  Will liability for underfunding, or for non-compliance with other ERISA requirements, jeopardize assets of the affiliated church bodies?

As we enter 2016, I want to again thank all of you who read Religion Clause-- both long-time followers and those who have discovered the blog more recently. Religion Clause's established format of neutrality, broad coverage and links to extensive primary source material has produced a loyal readership.  Often Religion Clause carries a story well before mainstream media feature it. The world of social media continues to evolve.  Increasing numbers of readers follow Religion Clause on Twitter or Facebook, and perhaps in other ways as well.  Meanwhile, the ability to comment on postings, while available, apparently has little attraction to readers-- other than the occasional spammer who evades my anti-spam efforts.  I am always eager to receive suggestions of other formats that would be useful.

And thanks to all of you who send me leads or corrections. Your input is important in maintaining completeness and accuracy. I read all of your e-mails and comments and appreciate receiving them, even though time constraints often prevent me from replying individually. Normally when I blog on a story sent to me by a reader, I mention the sender. If you do not want to be mentioned, I will be happy to honor that request if you let me know when sending me information.

I continue to be pleased that my regular readers span the political and religious spectrum and include a large number of law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns.  I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues and friends who might find it of interest.

Finally, I remind you that the Religion Clause sidebar contains links to a wealth of resources.  If you find broken links on the sidebar, please let me know.

Best wishes for 2016!  Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) or through comments to this or other posts throughout the year.

Howard M. Friedman

Happy New Year 2015!

Dear Religion Clause Readers:

Happy New Year 2015!  Last year was important.  The religious liberty and church-state developments of 2014 have raised fundamental questions about arrangements that have evolved over decades in the United States:

• Does the Religious Freedom Restoration Act still draw the proper balance for religious accommodation?  
• Should the civil and religious aspect of marriage be more clearly separated?
• As small and marginal faith groups, as well as mainstream ones, compete for a place on statehouse lawns and in lineups for delivering legislative invocations, is a rush toward creating limited public forums for religious expression still the preferable policy? 
• Can the government assure universal access to health care services that some find religiously objectionable without creating a single-payer system?
• How much of a burden on third parties is justified in order to provide religious accommodation?

Religion Clause has attempted to provide the raw materials for the inevitable debate over these and other important policy questions. I have also attempted to expand coverage of law and religion issues arising outside the United States.

As we enter 2015, I want to again thank all of you who read Religion Clause-- both long-time followers and those who have discovered the blog more recently. And thanks to all of you who send me leads or corrections. Your input is important in maintaining completeness and accuracy. I read all of your e-mails and comments and appreciate receiving them, even though time constraints often prevent me from replying individually. Normally when I blog on a story sent to me by a reader, I mention the sender. If you do not want to be mentioned, I will be happy to honor that request if you let me know when sending me information.

Religion Clause's established format of neutrality, broad coverage and links to extensive primary source material has produced a loyal readership.  Often Religion Clause carries a story well before mainstream media feature it. This year, for the sixth time in 8 years, Religion Clause was named by the ABA Journal as one of the 100 top blogs for a legal audience. This year Religion Clause was also added to the ABA's "Blawg 100 Hall of Fame."

StatCounter shows over 256,000 vists to the blog during 2014, but those numbers are skewed for many reasons. For me, raw numbers are not as important as the quality of the audience and the usefulness of the blog to readers. On this score, I am pleased that my regular readers span the political and religious spectrum and include a large number of law school faculty, journalists, clergy, governmental agency personnel, and others working professionally dealing with church-state relations and religious liberty concerns.  I encourage you to recommend Religion Clause to colleagues and friends who might find it of interest.  Increasingly readers are finding Religion Clause through links on Twitter and Facebook.  I urge you to share Religion Clause postings on your social media platforms.

Finally, I remind you that the Religion Clause sidebar contains links to a wealth of resources.

Feel free to contact me by e-mail (religionclause@gmail.com) or through comments to this or other posts throughout the year.

Best wishes for 2015!  It is already shaping up as a year of important developments.

Howard M. Friedman