book review forward -Reply

[Mark Tushnet]

Here's a restatement of the argument I (and I
think Stephen Feldman in a somewhat different
version) was making about the Supreme Court and
its biases (institutional, not personal):  For
reasons rooted in the culture of which it is part,
the Supreme Court is likely systematically to
favor secularism over religion in general, and,
within the category of religion, mainstream and
majority religions over non-mainstream and
minority ones.  Thus, if one gives the Court the
power the "protect" religious liberty, the effect
will be to favor secularism over religion, and
mainstream and majority religions over
non-mainstream and minority ones.

What's wrong--not factually, but morally or
vis-a-vis the "respect" someone in my position
owes to the Court as an institution--with that
argument?

Mark Tushnet
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Ave. NW
Washington, DC  20001

202-662-9106
   (fax) 202-662-9497
tushnet at law.georgetown.edu