The Federalist Papers is a collection of 85 articles and essays written by Alexander Hamilton , James Madison , and John Jay under the collective pseudonym "Publius" to promote the ratification of the Constitution of the United States . The collection was commonly known as The Federalist until the name The Federalist Papers emerged in the twentieth century.
171-690: In United States law, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution , together with that Amendment's Free Exercise Clause , form the constitutional right of freedom of religion . The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... The Establishment Clause acts as
342-418: A Bill of Rights , insisting that the various provisions in the proposed Constitution protecting liberty amount to a "bill of rights." Federalist No. 78 , also written by Hamilton, lays the groundwork for the doctrine of judicial review by federal courts of federal legislation or executive acts. Federalist No. 70 presents Hamilton's case for a one-man chief executive. In Federalist No. 39 , Madison presents
513-699: A California law providing for the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance (which includes the phrase "under God") in classrooms. Each House of Congress passed resolutions reaffirming their support for the pledge; the Senate vote was 99–0 and the House vote was 416–3. The Supreme Court heard arguments on the case, but did not rule on the merits, instead reversing the Ninth Circuit's decision on standing grounds. The inclusion of religious symbols in public holiday displays came before
684-681: A Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia proposed a new constitution on September 17, 1787, featuring among other changes a stronger chief executive. George Mason , a Constitutional Convention delegate and the drafter of Virginia's Declaration of Rights, proposed that the Constitution include a bill of rights listing and guaranteeing civil liberties . Other delegates—including future Bill of Rights drafter James Madison —disagreed, arguing that existing state guarantees of civil liberties were sufficient and any attempt to enumerate individual rights risked
855-614: A "dubious distinction". Probably of greater importance to the Virginia debate, in any case, were George Washington's support for the proposed Constitution and the presence of Madison and Edmund Randolph , the governor, at the convention arguing for ratification. Defunct Newspapers Journals TV channels Websites Other Economics Gun rights Identity politics Nativist Religion Watchdog groups Youth/student groups Miscellaneous Other In Federalist No. 1 , Hamilton listed six topics to be covered in
1026-461: A Bill of Rights. Nevertheless, the supporters of the Constitution (known as Federalists ) in order to secure its ratification in Massachusetts , agreed to add a group of amendments to the Constitution after its ratification that would serve as a Bill of Rights. Later, six more states likewise recommended the addition of a Bill of Rights, and the idea was also endorsed by Jefferson and Madison. When
1197-546: A State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person 'to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.' Neither can it constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can it aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs. At the core of the Establishment Clause lays
1368-662: A capricious right, i.e. universal, broad, and deep—though not absolute. Justice Field put it clearly in Davis v. Beason (1890): "However free the exercise of religion may be, it must be subordinate to the criminal laws of the country, passed with reference to actions regarded by general consent as properly the subjects of punitive legislation." Furthermore, the Supreme Court in Employment Division v. Smith made clear that "the right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of
1539-422: A classic in political science unsurpassed in both breadth and depth by the product of any later American writer." On June 21, 1788, the proposed Constitution was ratified by the minimum of nine states required under Article VII. In late July 1788, with eleven states having ratified the new Constitution, the process of organizing the new government began. The Federal Convention (Constitutional Convention) sent
1710-594: A community may not suppress, or the state tax, the dissemination of views because they are unpopular, annoying or distasteful. If that device were ever sanctioned, there would have been forged a ready instrument for the suppression of the faith which any minority cherishes but which does not happen to be in favor. That would be a complete repudiation of the philosophy of the Bill of Rights . In his dissenting opinion in McGowan v. Maryland (1961), Justice William O. Douglas illustrated
1881-652: A double protection, for it is a shield not only against outright prohibitions with respect to the free exercise of religion, but also against penalties on the free exercise of religion and against indirect governmental coercion. Relying on Employment Division v. Smith (1990) and quoting from Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah (1993) the Supreme Court stated in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer (2017) that religious observers are protected against unequal treatment by virtue of
SECTION 10
#17328582731642052-419: A double security, for its aim is as well the prevention of religious control over government as the prevention of political control over religion. The First Amendment's framers knew that intertwining government with religion could lead to bloodshed or oppression, because this happened too often historically. To prevent this dangerous development they set up the Establishment Clause as a line of demarcation between
2223-527: A double security, prohibiting both control of the government by religion and political control of religion by the government. By it, the federal government of the United States and, by later extension, the governments of all U.S. states and U.S. territories , are prohibited from establishing or sponsoring religion. The clause was based on a number of precedents, including the Constitutions of Clarendon ,
2394-466: A large, commercial republic . This is complemented by Federalist No. 14 , in which Madison takes the measure of the United States, declares it appropriate for an extended republic, and concludes with a memorable defense of the constitutional and political creativity of the Federal Convention. In Federalist No. 84 , Hamilton makes the case that there is no need to amend the Constitution by adding
2565-501: A leading member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia (1789–1797), secretary of state (1801–1809), and ultimately the fourth president of the United States (1809–1817). John Jay, who had been secretary for foreign affairs under the Articles of Confederation from 1784 through their expiration in 1789, became the first Chief Justice of the United States in 1789, stepping down in 1795 to accept election as governor of New York,
2736-402: A list emerged, claiming that he alone had written two-thirds of The Federalist essays. Some believe that several of these essays were written by Madison (Nos. 49–58 and 62–63). The scholarly detective work of Douglass Adair in 1944 postulated the following assignments of authorship, corroborated in 1964 by a computer analysis of the text: In six months, a total of 85 articles were written by
2907-483: A list of the only rights that people had. However, Hamilton's opposition to a Bill of Rights was far from universal. Robert Yates , writing under the pseudonym " Brutus ", articulated this view point in the so-called Anti-Federalist No. 84 , asserting that a government unrestrained by such a bill could easily devolve into tyranny. References in The Federalist and in the ratification debates warn of demagogues of
3078-586: A measured defense and extensive explanation of the proposed Constitution to the people of the state of New York. He wrote in Federalist No. 1 that the series would "endeavor to give a satisfactory answer to all the objections which shall have made their appearance, that may seem to have any claim to your attention." Hamilton recruited collaborators for the project. He enlisted John Jay , who after four essays ( Federalist Nos. 2 , 3 , 4 , and 5 ), fell ill and contributed only one more essay, Federalist No. 64 , to
3249-467: A new national church. In Orange County, Virginia , two federalist candidates, James Madison and James Gordon Jr., were running against two anti-federalists (opponents of the Constitution), Thomas Barbour and Charles Porter. Barbour requested to John Leland , an influential Baptist preacher and fervent lifelong proponent of religious liberty, that he write a letter to Barbour outlining his objections to
3420-437: A period of silence for the purpose of private prayer. The Court did not, however, find that the moment of silence was itself unconstitutional. Rather, it ruled that Alabama lawmakers had passed the statute solely to advance religion, thereby violating the secular purpose test. The 1990s were marked by controversies surrounding religion's role in public affairs. In Lee v. Weisman (1992), the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional
3591-467: A person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither
SECTION 20
#17328582731643762-534: A post he held for two terms, retiring in 1801. The Federalist articles appeared in three New York newspapers: The Independent Journal , the New-York Packet , and the Daily Advertiser , beginning on October 27, 1787. Although written and published with haste, The Federalist articles were widely read and greatly influenced the shape of American political institutions. Hamilton, Madison and Jay published
3933-501: A religious capacity to exercise governmental power; or for the government to extend benefits to some religious entities and not others without adequate secular justification. Originally, the First Amendment applied only to the federal government, and some states continued official state religions after ratification. Massachusetts , for example, was officially Congregational until the 1830s. In Everson v. Board of Education (1947),
4104-453: A religious observance compulsory. It may not coerce anyone to attend church, to observe a religious holiday, or to take religious instruction. But it can close its doors or suspend its operations as to those who want to repair to their religious sanctuary for worship or instruction." In McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union (2005) the Court explained that when the government acts with
4275-485: A repugnant belief, Torcaso v. Watkins , 367 U. S. 488; nor penalize or discriminate against individuals or groups because they hold religious views abhorrent to the authorities, Fowler v. Rhode Island , 345 U. S. 67; nor employ the taxing power to inhibit the dissemination of particular religious views, Murdock v. Pennsylvania , 319 U. S. 105; Follett v. McCormick , 321 U. S. 573; cf. Grosjean v. American Press Co. , 297 U. S. 233." The Free Exercise Clause offers
4446-431: A secular display, and thus were considered to have a religious purpose. In the 1964 case McGowan v. Maryland , the Supreme Court held that blue laws which restricted the sale of goods on Sundays (and were originally intended to increase Church attendance) did not violate the Establishment Clause because they served a present secular purpose of providing a uniform day of rest for everyone. Clarence Thomas , Justice of
4617-556: A single church as its official religion. These official churches enjoyed privileges not granted to other religious groups. Massachusetts and Connecticut supported the Congregational church by taxes. In colonial South Carolina , the Anglican Church benefited from church taxes. Other colonies would more generally assist religion by requiring taxes that would partially fund religious institutions - taxpayers could direct payments to
4788-512: A state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson , the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between church and State." The New Jersey law was upheld, for it applied "to all its citizens without regard to their religious belief". After Everson , lawsuits in several states sought to disentangle public monies from religious teaching,
4959-587: A way that would tend to establish a state church, or (2) coerces people to support or participate in religion against their will. In Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe (2000), the Court ruled that a vote of the student body could not authorize student-led prayer prior to school events. In 2002, controversy centered on a ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow (2002), which struck down
5130-654: A widely held consensus that there should be no nationally established church after the American Revolutionary War . Against this background the National Constitution Center states: Virtually all jurists agree that it would violate the Establishment Clause for the government to compel attendance or financial support of a religious institution as such, for the government to interfere with a religious organization's selection of clergy or religious doctrine; for religious organizations or figures acting in
5301-432: Is "an establishment of religion." The term "establishment" denoted in general direct aid to the church by the government. In Larkin v. Grendel's Den, Inc. (1982) the Supreme Court stated that "the core rationale underlying the Establishment Clause is preventing 'a fusion of governmental and religious functions,' Abington School District v. Schempp , 374 U. S. 203, 374 U. S. 222 (1963)." The Establishment Clause acts as
Establishment Clause - Misplaced Pages Continue
5472-476: Is "the right of all persons to believe, speak, and act – individually and in community with others, in private and in public – in accord with their understanding of ultimate truth." The acknowledgement of religious freedom as the first right protected in the Bill of Rights points toward the American founders' understanding of the importance of religion to human, social, and political flourishing. Freedom of religion
5643-469: Is a useful metaphor, but is not an accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists. The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any." The acknowledgement of religious freedom as the first right protected in the Bill of Rights points toward
5814-481: Is absolute. Federal or state legislation cannot therefore make it a crime to hold any religious belief or opinion due to the Free Exercise Clause. Legislation by the United States or any constituent state of the United States which forces anyone to embrace any religious belief or to say or believe anything in conflict with his religious tenets is also barred by the Free Exercise Clause. Against this background,
5985-527: Is complemented by the Free Exercise Clause, which prohibits government interference with religious belief and, within limits, religious practice. The Establishment Clause is a limitation placed upon the United States Congress preventing it from passing legislation establishing an official religion and, by interpretation, makes it illegal for the government to promote theocracy or promote a specific religion with taxes. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits
6156-638: Is no part of the official business of government to compose official prayers for any group of American people to recite as part of a religious program carried out by the Government." The reading of the Lord's Prayer or of the Bible in the classroom of a public school by the teacher was ruled unconstitutional in 1963. The ruling did not apply to parochial or private schools in general. The decision has been met with both criticism and praise. Many social conservatives are critical of
6327-468: Is not possible in an absolute sense. Some relationship between government and religious organizations is inevitable", the court wrote. "Judicial caveats against entanglement must recognize that the line of separation, far from being a 'wall', is a blurred, indistinct, and variable barrier depending on all the circumstances of a particular relationship." After the Supreme Court ruling in the coach praying case of Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022),
6498-469: Is protected by the First Amendment through its Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause , which together form the religious liberty clauses of the First Amendment. The first clause prohibits any governmental "establishment of religion" and the second prohibits any governmental interference with "the free exercise thereof." These clauses of the First Amendment encompass "the two big arenas of religion in constitutional law . Establishment cases deal with
6669-469: Is questionable. Separate ratification proceedings took place in each state, and the essays were not reliably reprinted outside of New York; furthermore, by the time the series was well underway, a number of important states had already ratified it, for instance Pennsylvania on December 12. New York held out until July 26; certainly The Federalist was more important there than anywhere else, but Furtwangler argues that it "could hardly rival other major forces in
6840-504: Is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere [only] when [religious] principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order.' In these two sentences is found the true distinction between what properly belongs to the church and what to the State. Reynolds was the first Supreme Court decision to use the metaphor "a wall of separation between Church and State." American historian George Bancroft
7011-487: The Bill of Rights 1689 , and the first constitutions of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. An initial draft by John Dickinson was prepared in conjunction with his drafting the Articles of Confederation . In 1789, then-congressman James Madison prepared another draft which, after discussion and debate in the First Congress , would become part of the text of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights . The Establishment Clause
Establishment Clause - Misplaced Pages Continue
7182-473: The Church of England in Virginia and guaranteed freedom of religion exercise to men of all religious faiths, including Catholics and Jews as well as members of all Protestant denominations. The First Amendment is part of a group of 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution known as the Bill of Rights. The idea of adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution was proposed by George Mason five days before
7353-526: The Incorporation doctrine , the Bill of Rights has been broadly applied to limit state and local government as well. The process of incorporating the two Religion Clauses in the First Amendment was twofold. The first step was the Supreme Court's conclusion in 1940 that the Free Exercise Clause was made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Conceptually, this raised few difficulties:
7524-505: The Lemon test , declaring that an action was an establishment if: The Lemon test has been criticized by justices and legal scholars, but it has remained the predominant means by which the Court enforced the Establishment Clause. In Agostini v. Felton (1997), the entanglement prong of the Lemon test was converted to simply being a factor in determining the effect of the challenged statute or practice. In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002),
7695-456: The Lemon test , which judges have often used to test the constitutionality of a statute on establishment clause grounds. The Supreme Court decided Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist and Sloan v. Lemon in 1973. In both cases, states— New York and Pennsylvania —had enacted laws whereby public tax revenues would be paid to low-income parents so as to permit them to send students to private schools. It
7866-537: The United States Bill of Rights . The idea of adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution was originally controversial because the Constitution, as written, did not specifically enumerate or protect the rights of the people, rather it listed the powers of the government and left all that remained to the states and the people. Alexander Hamilton , the author of Federalist No. 84, feared that such an enumeration, once written down explicitly, would later be interpreted as
8037-482: The precedent "that laws affecting certain religious practices do not violate the right to free exercise of religion as long as the laws are neutral, generally applicable, and not motivated by animus to religion." To accept any creed or the practice of any form of worship cannot be compelled by laws, because, as stated by the Supreme Court in Braunfeld v. Brown (1961), the freedom to hold religious beliefs and opinions
8208-731: The sovereign in religious activity . The Establishment Clause thus serves to ensure laws, as said by Supreme Court in Gillette v. United States (1970), which are "secular in purpose, evenhanded in operation, and neutral in primary impact". The First Amendment's prohibition on an establishment of religion includes many things from prayer in widely varying government settings over financial aid for religious individuals and institutions to comment on religious questions. The Supreme Court stated in this context: "In these varied settings, issues of about interpreting inexact Establishment Clause language, like difficult interpretative issues generally, arise from
8379-654: The 1960s, during the Warren Court era. One of the Court's most controversial decisions came in Engel v. Vitale in 1962. The case involved the mandatory daily recitation by public school officials of a prayer written by the New York Board of Regents, which read "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country". The Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional and struck it down, with Justice Black writing "it
8550-507: The Amendment's intent. Congress approved and submitted to the states for their ratification twelve articles of amendment on September 25, 1789. The revised text of the third article became the First Amendment, because the last ten articles of the submitted 12 articles were ratified by the requisite number of states on December 15, 1791, and are now known collectively as the Bill of Rights . Religious liberty, also known as freedom of religion,
8721-726: The American founders' understanding of the importance of religion to human, social, and political flourishing. The First Amendment makes clear that it sought to protect "the free exercise" of religion, or what might be called "free exercise equality." Free exercise is the liberty of persons to reach, hold, practice and change beliefs freely according to the dictates of conscience. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits governmental interference with religious belief and, within limits, religious practice. "Freedom of religion means freedom to hold an opinion or belief, but not to take action in violation of social duties or subversive to good order." The clause withdraws from legislative power, state and federal ,
SECTION 50
#17328582731648892-646: The Catholic Church) to seek exemption from criminal prosecution. The 1689 English Bill of Rights secured the rights of all "persons" to be free from establishment of Roman Catholic laws in the government of England. The original Mason-Dixon line was the demarcation line between the Catholic colony of Maryland and the New Jersey and Pennsylvania colonies, which followed the 1689 Bill of Rights and their own colonial constitutions which provided similar protections against
9063-485: The Constitution in states where popular sentiment was against ratification (including Virginia, Massachusetts, and New York) successfully proposed that their state conventions both ratify the Constitution and call for the addition of a bill of rights. The U.S. Constitution was eventually ratified by all thirteen states. In the 1st United States Congress , following the state legislatures' request, James Madison proposed twenty constitutional amendments, and his proposed draft of
9234-494: The Constitution's ban on Congress endorsing, promoting or becoming too involved with religion. Free exercise cases deal with Americans' rights to practice their faith." Both clauses sometimes compete with each other. The Supreme Court in McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union (2005) clarified this by the following example: When the government spends money on the clergy, then it looks like establishing religion, but if
9405-406: The Court concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion." In a series of cases in the first decade of the 2000s— Van Orden v. Perry (2005), McCreary County v. ACLU (2005), and Salazar v. Buono (2010) —the Court considered the issue of religious monuments on federal lands without reaching a majority reasoning on the subject. Everson used
9576-462: The Court has prevented states from directly funding parochial schools, it has not stopped them from aiding religious colleges and universities. In Tilton v. Richardson (1971), the Court permitted the use of public funds for the construction of facilities in religious institutions of higher learning. It was found that there was no "excessive entanglement" since the buildings were themselves not religious, unlike teachers in parochial schools, and because
9747-495: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is understood to incorporate only individual rights found in the Bill of Rights; the Establishment Clause, unlike the Free Exercise Clause (which critics readily concede protects individual rights), does not purport to protect individual rights. Prior to American independence, most of the original colonies supported religious activities with taxes, with several colonies choosing
9918-439: The Due Process Clause protects those rights in the Bill of Rights "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," and free exercise of religion is a quintessential individual right (and had been recognized as such at the state level from the beginning). Incorporation of the Establishment Clause in 1947 proved to be problematic in several ways and subject to criticism. The controversy concerning its incorporation results primarily from
10089-514: The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. Burger's successor, William Rehnquist , called for the abandonment of the "wall of separation between church and State" metaphor in Wallace v. Jaffree (1985), because he believed this metaphor was based on bad history and proved itself useless as a guide to judging. David Shultz has said that accommodationists claim the Lemon test should be applied selectively. As such, for many conservatives ,
10260-404: The Establishment Clause solely prevents the establishment of a state church , not public acknowledgements of God nor 'developing policies that encourage general religious beliefs that do not favor a particular sect and are consistent with the secular government's goals'. In Lynch v. Donnelly (1984), the Supreme Court observed that the "concept of a "wall" of separation between church and state
10431-425: The First Amendment applies only to state actors , there is a common misconception that it prohibits anyone from limiting free speech, including private, non-governmental entities. Moreover, the Supreme Court has determined that protection of speech is not absolute. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
SECTION 60
#173285827316410602-401: The First Amendment read as follows: The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed. The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of
10773-536: The First Federal Congress met in 1789, Madison implemented the idea by introducing 17 Amendments to the Constitution. By December 1791, ten of his Amendments were ratified by the necessary three quarters of the states, and they became part of the US Constitution, thereafter becoming known as "the Bill of Rights". The Establishment Clause addressed the concerns of members of minority faiths who did not want
10944-407: The Fourteenth Amendment . In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), the Court drew on Thomas Jefferson 's correspondence to call for "a wall of separation between church and State", a literary but clarifying metaphor for the separation of religions from government and vice versa as well as the free exercise of religious beliefs that many Founders favored. Through decades of contentious litigation,
11115-536: The Free Exercise Clause and laws which target the religious for "special disabilities" based on their "religious status" must be covered by the application of strict scrutiny . In Reynolds v. United States (1878), the Supreme Court found that while laws cannot interfere with religious belief and opinions, laws can regulate religious practices like human sacrifice or the obsolete Hindu practice of suttee . The Court stated that to rule otherwise, "would be to make
11286-416: The Free Exercise Clause to the states. While the right to have religious beliefs is absolute, the freedom to act on such beliefs is not absolute. Religious freedom is a universal right of all human beings and all religions, providing for the free exercise of religion or free exercise equality . Due to its nature as fundamental to the American founding and to the ordering of human society, it is rightly seen as
11457-566: The Lemon Test may have been replaced or complemented with a reference to historical practices and understandings. Accommodationists , in contrast, argue along with Justice William O. Douglas that "[w]e are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being." Furthermore, as observed by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger in Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York (1970) with respect to
11628-484: The McLean edition for essay numbers 77–85. While the authorship of 73 of The Federalist essays is fairly certain, the identities of those who wrote the twelve remaining essays are disputed by some scholars. The modern consensus is that Madison wrote essays Nos. 49–58, with Nos. 18–20 being products of a collaboration between him and Hamilton; No. 64 was by John Jay. The first open designation of which essay belonged to whom
11799-674: The New Constitution, as Agreed upon by the Federal Convention, September 17, 1787 , by publishing firm J. & A. McLean in March and May 1788. The last eight papers (Nos. 78–85) were republished in the New York newspapers between June 14 and August 16, 1788. The authors of The Federalist intended to influence the voters to ratify the Constitution. In Federalist No. 1 , they explicitly set that debate in broad political terms: It has been frequently remarked, that it seems to have been reserved to
11970-422: The New York publishing firm J. & A. McLean announced that they would publish the first 36 essays as a bound volume; that volume was released on March 22, 1788, and was titled The Federalist Volume 1. New essays continued to appear in the newspapers; Federalist No. 77 was the last number to appear first in that form, on April 2. A second bound volume was released on May 28, containing Federalist Nos. 37–77 and
12141-844: The Protestant denomination of their choosing. Only the colonies of Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island did not require a tax to support religion. During and after the American Revolution, religious minorities, such as the Methodists and the Baptists, argued that taxes to support religion violated freedoms won from the British. Defenders of the practice argued that government needed to fund religious institutions because public virtue depended on these institutions which could not survive purely on private donations. The Supreme Court first considered
12312-489: The State regulates conduct by enacting a general law within its power, the purpose and effect of which is to advance the State's secular goals, the statute is valid despite its indirect burden on religious observance unless the State may accomplish its purpose by means which do not impose such a burden. In Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940), the Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applied
12483-455: The Supreme Court incorporated the Establishment Clause (i.e., made it apply against the states): The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another ... in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law
12654-566: The Supreme Court further observed: "Government may not finance religious groups nor undertake religious instruction nor blend secular and sectarian education nor use secular institutions to force one or some religion on any person. But we find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence. The government must be neutral when it comes to competition between sects. It may not thrust any sect on any person. It may not make
12825-511: The Supreme Court in Lynch v. Donnelly (1984), and again in Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU (1989). In the former case, the Court upheld the public display of a crèche , ruling that any benefit to religion was "indirect, remote, and incidental." In Allegheny County , however, the Court struck down a crèche display, which occupied a prominent position in the county courthouse and bore
12996-404: The Supreme Court of the United States, has disputed that the Establishment Clause applies to the states, thereby making it possible for the states to establish a state religion. In 2013, North Carolina politicians proposed a bill that could have seen North Carolina establish an official religion for the state. An 2013 YouGov poll found that 34% of people would favor establishing Christianity as
13167-400: The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protected against prior restraint —pre-publication censorship—in almost all cases. The Petition Clause protects the right to petition all branches and agencies of government for action. In addition to the right of assembly guaranteed by this clause, the Court has also ruled that the amendment implicitly protects freedom of association . Although
13338-628: The Supreme Court stated that Free Exercise Clause broadly protects religious beliefs and opinions: The Federalist Papers The first seventy-seven of these essays were published serially in the Independent Journal , the New York Packet , and The Daily Advertiser between October 1787 and April 1788. A compilation of these 77 essays and eight others were published in two volumes as The Federalist: A Collection of Essays, Written in Favour of
13509-433: The Supreme Court upheld a New Jersey statute funding student transportation to schools, whether parochial or not. Justice Hugo Black held, The "establishment of religion " clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence
13680-436: The Supreme Court used these words to declare that "it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured. Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere [religious] opinion, but was left free to reach [only those religious] actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order." Quoting from Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom
13851-508: The aid came in the form of a one-time grant, rather than continuous assistance. One of the largest recent controversies over the amendment centered on school vouchers —government aid for students to attend private and predominantly religious schools. The Supreme Court, in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), upheld the constitutionality of private school vouchers, turning away an Establishment Clause challenge. Further important decisions came in
14022-432: The approval of the authors. In 1863, Henry Dawson published an edition containing the original text of the papers, arguing that they should be preserved as they were written in that particular historical moment, not as edited by the authors years later. Modern scholars generally use the text prepared by Jacob E. Cooke for his 1961 edition of The Federalist ; this edition used the newspaper texts for essay numbers 1–76 and
14193-526: The author of each individual essay. After examining word choice and writing style, studies generally agree that the disputed essays were written by James Madison. However, there are notable exceptions maintaining that some of the essays which are now widely attributed to Madison were, in fact, collaborative efforts. The Federalist Papers were written to support the ratification of the Constitution, specifically in New York . Whether they succeeded in this mission
14364-439: The authors of that work have been justly supposed to be entitled to great respect in expounding the Constitution. No tribute can be paid to them which exceeds their merit; but in applying their opinions to the cases which may arise in the progress of our government, a right to judge of their correctness must be retained." In a letter to Thomas Ritchie in 1821, James Madison stated of the Constitution that "the legitimate meaning of
14535-434: The authors. Hopkins wished as well that "the name of the writer should be prefixed to each number," but at this point Hamilton insisted that this was not to be, and the division of the essays among the three authors remained a secret. The first publication to divide the papers in such a way was an 1810 edition that used a list left by Hamilton to associate the authors with their numbers; this edition appeared as two volumes of
14706-443: The boundaries between church and state must therefore answer a difficult question: Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly? -- Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in her concurring opinion in McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union (2005). The First Amendment tolerates neither governmentally established religion nor governmental interference with religion. One of
14877-434: The broad protections offered by the First Amendment's religious liberty clauses: The First Amendment commands government to have no interest in theology or ritual; it admonishes government to be interested in allowing religious freedom to flourish—whether the result is to produce Catholics , Jews, or Protestants , or to turn the people toward the path of Buddha , or to end in a predominantly Moslem nation, or to produce in
15048-506: The burden of proof for defamation and libel suits, most notably in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964). Commercial speech, however, is less protected by the First Amendment than political speech, and is therefore subject to greater regulation. The Free Press Clause protects publication of information and opinions, and applies to a wide variety of media. In Near v. Minnesota (1931) and New York Times v. United States (1971),
15219-420: The central purposes of the First Amendment, the Supreme Court wrote in Gillette v. United States (1970), consists "of ensuring governmental neutrality in matters of religion." The history of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause and the Supreme Court's own constitutional jurisprudence with respect to these clauses was explained in the 1985 case Wallace v. Jaffree . The Supreme Court noted at
15390-406: The clearest exposition of what has come to be called " Federalism ". In Federalist No. 51 , Madison distills arguments for checks and balances in an essay often quoted for its justification of government as "the greatest of all reflections on human nature." According to historian Richard B. Morris , the essays that make up The Federalist Papers are an "incomparable exposition of the Constitution,
15561-401: The compiled "Works of Hamilton". In 1818, Jacob Gideon published a new edition with a new listing of authors, based on a list provided by Madison. The difference between Hamilton's list and Madison's formed the basis for a dispute over the authorship of a dozen of the essays. Both Hopkins's and Gideon's editions incorporated significant edits to the text of the papers themselves, generally with
15732-595: The conclusion of the Constitutional Convention held in Philadelphia in 1787. His proposal was rejected by the other delegates. Alexander Hamilton later argued in The Federalist Papers that a Bill of Rights was unnecessary, claiming that since the Constitution granted limited powers to the federal government, it did not grant the new government the power to abuse the rights that would be secured by
15903-425: The conscience of the infidel , the atheist , or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all. This conclusion derives support not only from
16074-550: The core principle of denominational neutrality. In Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) the Supreme Court outlined the broad principle of denominational neutrality mandated by the First Amendment: "Government in our democracy, state and national, must be neutral in matters of religious theory, doctrine, and practice. It may not be hostile to any religion or to the advocacy of no-religion, and it may not aid, foster, or promote one religion or religious theory against another or even against
16245-458: The court stated further in Reynolds : In the preamble of this act ... religious freedom is defined; and after a recital 'that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty,' it is declared 'that it
16416-513: The court's reasoning, including the late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist . Conversely, the ACLU and other civil libertarian groups hailed the court's decision. In Abington Township v. Schempp (1963), the case involving the mandatory reading of the Lord's Prayer in class, the Supreme Court introduced the "secular purpose" and "primary effect" tests, which were to be used to determine compatibility with
16587-521: The disbeliever and the uncertain . The precise meaning of the Establishment Clause can be traced back to the beginning of the 19th century. Thomas Jefferson wrote about the First Amendment and its restriction on Congress in an 1802 reply to the Danbury Baptists , a religious minority that was concerned about the dominant position of the Congregational church in Connecticut , who had written to
16758-456: The essays at a rapid pace. At times, three to four new essays by Publius appeared in the papers in a single week. Garry Wills observes that this fast pace of production "overwhelmed" any possible response: "Who, given ample time could have answered such a battery of arguments? And no time was given." Hamilton also encouraged the reprinting of the essays in newspapers outside New York state, and indeed they were published in several other states where
16929-640: The essays. Madison did not immediately dispute Hamilton's list, but provided his own list for the 1818 Gideon edition of The Federalist . Madison claimed 29 essays for himself, and he suggested that the difference between the two lists was "owing doubtless to the hurry in which [Hamilton's] memorandum was made out." A known error in Hamilton's list—Hamilton incorrectly ascribed No. 54 to John Jay, when in fact, Jay wrote No. 64—provided some evidence for Madison's suggestion. Statistical analysis has been undertaken on several occasions in attempts to accurately identify
17100-541: The establishment clause. Essentially, the law in question must have a valid secular purpose, and its primary effect must not be to promote or inhibit a particular religion. Since the law requiring the recital of the Lord's Prayer violated these tests, it was struck down. The "excessive entanglement" test was added in Lemon v. Kurtzman ( vide supra ). In Wallace v. Jaffree (1985), the Supreme Court struck down an Alabama law whereby students in public schools would observe daily
17271-595: The establishment of Catholic laws in government. A possible additional precursor of the Free Exercise Clause was the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. The statute was drafted by Thomas Jefferson in 1777 and was introduced in the Virginia General Assembly in 1779. It did not pass the General Assembly until 1786. James Madison played an important role in its passage. The statute disestablished
17442-412: The exertion of any restraint on the free exercise of religion. Its purpose is to secure religious liberty in the individual by prohibiting any invasions thereof by civil authority. "The door of the Free Exercise Clause stands tightly closed against any governmental regulation of religious beliefs as such, Cantwell v. Connecticut , 310 U. S. 296, 310 U. S. 303. Government may neither compel affirmation of
17613-452: The fact that one of the intentions of the Establishment Clause was to prevent Congress from interfering with state establishments of religion that existed at the time of the founding (at least six states had established religions at the founding) – a fact conceded by even those members of the Court who believe the Establishment Clause was made applicable to the states through incorporation. Critics, such as Clarence Thomas , have also argued that
17784-501: The federal government to establish a state religion for the entire nation. The Baptists in Virginia , for example, had suffered discrimination prior to the state's disestablishment of the Anglican church in 1786. As Virginia prepared to hold its elections to the state ratifying convention in 1788, the Baptists were concerned that the Constitution had no safeguard against the creation of
17955-513: The first 20 papers are broken down as 11 by Hamilton, five by Madison and four by Jay. The rest of the series, however, is dominated by three long segments by a single writer: Nos. 21–36 by Hamilton, Nos. 37–58 by Madison, written while Hamilton was in Albany, and No. 65 through the end by Hamilton, published after Madison had left for Virginia. The Federalist Papers (specifically Federalist No. 84 ) are notable for their opposition to what later became
18126-646: The first cases directly dealing with display of the Ten Commandments the Court had heard since Stone v. Graham (1980). These cases were decided on June 27, 2005. In Van Orden , the Court upheld, by a 5–4 vote, the legality of a Ten Commandments display at the Texas State Capitol due to the monument's "secular purpose". In McCreary County , however, the Court ruled 5–4 that displays of the Ten Commandments in several Kentucky county courthouses were unconstitutional because they were not clearly integrated with
18297-410: The first decision to mention The Federalist ). By 2000 , The Federalist had been quoted 291 times in Supreme Court decisions. The amount of deference that should be given to The Federalist Papers in constitutional interpretation has always been somewhat controversial. As early as 1819, Chief Justice John Marshall noted in the famous case McCulloch v. Maryland , that "the opinions expressed by
18468-429: The free exercise thereof", thus building a wall of separation between Church & State . Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. In Reynolds v. United States (1878)
18639-487: The functions and operations of the institutions of religion and government in society. The Federal government of the United States as well as the state governments are prohibited from establishing or sponsoring religion, because, as observed by the Supreme Court in Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York (1970), the 'establishment' of a religion historically implied sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of
18810-539: The fund that will support it? The "establishment" clause protects citizens also against any law which selects any religious custom, practice, or ritual, puts the force of government behind it, and fines, imprisons, or otherwise penalizes a person for not observing it. The Government plainly could not join forces with one religious group and decree a universal and symbolic circumcision . Nor could it require all children to be baptized or give tax exemptions only to those whose children were baptized. Those who would renegotiate
18981-415: The general tendency of the dissents as a weaker reading of the First Amendment; the dissents tend to be "less concerned about the dangers of establishment and less concerned to protect free exercise rights, particularly of religious minorities". Beginning with Everson , which permitted New Jersey school boards to pay for transportation to parochial schools, the Court has used various tests to determine when
19152-401: The government cannot pay for military chaplains , then many soldiers and sailors would be kept from the opportunity to exercise their chosen religions. The Supreme Court developed the preferred position doctrine. In Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943) the Supreme Court stated that "Freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom of religion are in a preferred position". The Court added: Plainly,
19323-513: The government from preventing the free exercise of religion. While the Establishment Clause prohibits Congress from preferring one religion over another, it does not prohibit the government's involvement with religion to make accommodations for religious observances and practices in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause. The Constitutions of Clarendon , a 12th-century English law, had prohibited criminal defendants' using religious laws (at that time, in medieval England, canon law of
19494-521: The historian George Bancroft , also discussed at some length the Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments by James Madison, who drafted the First Amendment; Madison used the metaphor of a "great barrier". In Everson , the Court adopted Jefferson's words. The Court has affirmed it often, with majority, but not unanimous, support. Warren Nord, in Does God Make a Difference? , characterized
19665-418: The impact of The Federalist on New York citizens was "negligible". As for Virginia, which ratified the Constitution only at its convention on June 25, Hamilton writes in a letter to Madison that the collected edition of The Federalist had been sent to Virginia; Furtwangler presumes that it was to act as a "debater's handbook for the convention there", though he claims that this indirect influence would be
19836-434: The implication that other, unnamed rights were unprotected. After a brief debate, Mason's proposal was defeated by a unanimous vote of the state delegations. For the constitution to be ratified, however, nine of the thirteen states were required to approve it in state conventions. Opposition to ratification ("Anti-Federalism") was partly based on the Constitution's lack of adequate guarantees for civil liberties. Supporters of
20007-408: The interest in respecting the individual's freedom of conscience, but also from the conviction that religious beliefs worthy of respect are the product of free and voluntary choice by the faithful, and from recognition of the fact that the political interest in forestalling intolerance extends beyond intolerance among Christian sects – or even intolerance among "religions" – to encompass intolerance of
20178-526: The invitation, and Hamilton rejected three essays written by Duer. Duer later wrote in support of the three Federalist authors under the name "Philo-Publius", meaning either "Friend of the People" or "Friend of Hamilton" based on Hamilton's pen name Publius . Hamilton chose the pseudonymous name "Publius". While many other pieces representing both sides of the constitutional debate were written under Roman names, historian Albert Furtwangler contends that " 'Publius'
20349-538: The leading case being the 1951 Dixon School Case of New Mexico. The Jefferson quotation cited in Black's opinion is from a letter Jefferson wrote in 1802 to the Baptists of Danbury , Connecticut , that there should be "a wall of separation between church and state ." Critics of Black's reasoning (most notably, former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist ) have argued that the majority of states did have "official" churches at
20520-423: The long run atheists or agnostics. On matters of this kind, government must be neutral . This freedom plainly includes freedom from religion, with the right to believe, speak, write, publish and advocate anti-religious programs. Board of Education v. Barnette , supra , 319 U. S. 641. Certainly the "free exercise" clause does not require that everyone embrace the theology of some church or of some faith, or observe
20691-402: The metaphor of a wall of separation between church and state , derived from the correspondence of President Thomas Jefferson . It had been long established in the decisions of the Supreme Court, beginning with Reynolds v. United States (1878), when the Court reviewed the history of the early Republic in deciding the extent of the liberties of Mormons. Chief Justice Morrison Waite, who consulted
20862-447: The militant opposite. The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and nonreligion." The clearest command of the Establishment Clause is, according to the Supreme Court in Larson v. Valente , 456 U.S. 228 (1982), that one religious denomination cannot be officially preferred over another. In Zorach v. Clauson (1952)
21033-496: The necessary reassurances. In any event, Leland cast his vote for Madison. Leland's support, according to Scarberry, was likely important to the overwhelming victory of Madison and Gordon. Prior to the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1868, the Supreme Court generally held that the substantive protections of the Bill of Rights did not apply to state governments. Subsequently, by
21204-498: The newly elected president about their concerns. Jefferson wrote back: Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
21375-429: The obligation to comply with a "valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law proscribes (or prescribes) conduct that his religion prescribes (or proscribes)." United States v. Lee , 455 U. S. 252, 455 U. S. 263, n. 3 (1982) ( STEVENS, J. , concurring in judgment); see Minersville School Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Gobitis , supra , 310 U.S. at 310 U. S. 595 (collecting cases)." Smith also set
21546-427: The offering of prayers by religious officials before voluntarily attending ceremonies such as graduation. Thus, the Court established that the state could not conduct religious exercises at public occasions even if attendance was not strictly compulsory. In Lee the Court developed the coercion test . Under this test the government does not violate the establishment clause unless it (1) provides direct aid to religion in
21717-564: The official state religion in their own state, 47% would be opposed and 19% were undecided. First Amendment to the United States Constitution The First Amendment ( Amendment I ) to the United States Constitution prevents Congress from making laws respecting an establishment of religion ; prohibiting the free exercise of religion ; or abridging the freedom of speech , the freedom of
21888-549: The opinion of the Court considered secular purpose and the absence of primary effect; a concurring opinion saw both cases as having treated entanglement as part of the primary purpose test. Further tests, such as the endorsement test and coercion test , have been developed to determine whether a government action violated the Establishment Clause. In Lemon , the Court stated that the separation of church and state could never be absolute: "Our prior holdings do not call for total separation between church and state; total separation
22059-452: The ostensible and predominant purpose of advancing religion, then it violates that central Establishment Clause value of official religious neutrality, because there is no neutrality when the government's ostensible object is to take sides. In Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution prohibits states and the federal government from requiring any kind of religious test for public office . The Supreme Court in
22230-416: The outset that the First Amendment limits equally the power of Congress and of the states to abridge the individual freedoms it protects. The First Amendment was adopted to curtail the power of Congress to interfere with the individual's freedom to believe, to worship, and to express himself in accordance with the dictates of his own conscience. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment imposes on
22401-418: The people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not, of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend, for their political constitutions, on accident and force. In Federalist No. 10 , Madison discusses the means of preventing rule by majority faction and advocates
22572-492: The precise boundaries of the mandated separation have been adjudicated in ways that periodically created controversy. Speech rights were expanded significantly in a series of 20th and 21st century court decisions which protected various forms of political speech, anonymous speech, campaign finance , pornography, and school speech ; these rulings also defined a series of exceptions to First Amendment protections . The Supreme Court overturned English common law precedent to increase
22743-462: The press , the freedom of assembly , or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights . In the original draft of the Bill of Rights, what is now the First Amendment occupied third place. The first two articles were not ratified by the states, so the article on disestablishment and free speech ended up being first. The Bill of Rights
22914-524: The press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable. The people shall not be restrained from peaceably assembling and consulting for their common good; nor from applying to the Legislature by petitions, or remonstrances, for redress of their grievances. This language was greatly condensed by Congress, and passed the House and Senate with almost no recorded debate, complicating future discussion of
23085-413: The press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. The right to petition for redress of grievances was a principle included in the 1215 Magna Carta , as well as the 1689 English Bill of Rights . In 1776, the second year of the American Revolutionary War , the Virginia colonial legislature passed a Declaration of Rights that included
23256-410: The previously unpublished Nos. 78–85. The last eight papers (Nos. 78–85) were republished in the New York newspapers between June 14 and August 16, 1788. A 1792 French edition ended the collective anonymity of Publius, announcing that the work had been written by "Mm. Hamilton, Maddisson e Gay, citoyens de l'État de New York". In 1802, George Hopkins published an American edition that similarly named
23427-457: The professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government would exist only in name under such circumstances." If the purpose or effect of a law is to impede the observance of one or all religions, or is to discriminate invidiously between religions, that law is constitutionally invalid even though the burden may be characterized as being only indirect. But if
23598-539: The proposed Constitution to the Confederation Congress, which in turn submitted it to the states for ratification at the end of September 1787. On September 27, 1787, "Cato" first appeared in the New York press criticizing the proposition; "Brutus" followed on October 18, 1787. These and other articles and public letters critical of the new Constitution would eventually become known as the " Anti-Federalist Papers ". In response, Alexander Hamilton decided to launch
23769-445: The proposed Constitution. Leland stated in the letter that, among his other concerns, the Constitution had no Bill of Rights and no safeguards for religious liberty and freedom of the press. A number of historians have concluded on the basis of compelling circumstantial evidence that, just prior to the election in March 1788, Madison met with Leland and gained his support of ratification by addressing these concerns and providing him with
23940-567: The question of financial assistance to religious organizations in Bradfield v. Roberts (1899). The federal government had funded a hospital operated by a Roman Catholic institution. In that case, the Court ruled that the funding was to a secular organization – the hospital – and was therefore permissible. During the twentieth century, the Supreme Court more closely scrutinized government activity involving religious institutions. In Everson v. Board of Education (1947),
24111-537: The ratification by Virginia, the tenth state, placed pressure on New York to ratify. In light of that, Furtwangler observes, "New York's refusal would make that state an odd outsider." Only 19 Federalists were elected to New York's ratification convention, compared to the Anti-Federalists' 46 delegates. While New York did indeed ratify the Constitution on July 26, the lack of public support for pro-Constitution Federalists has led historian John Kaminski to suggest that
24282-418: The ratification contests"—specifically, these forces included the personal influence of well-known Federalists, for instance Hamilton and Jay, and Anti-Federalists , including Governor George Clinton . Further, by the time New York came to a vote, ten states had already ratified the Constitution and it had thus already passed—only nine states had to ratify it for the new government to be established among them;
24453-439: The ratification debate was taking place. However, they were only irregularly published outside New York, and in other parts of the country they were often overshadowed by local writers. Because the essays were initially published in New York, most of them begin with the same salutation : "To the People of the State of New York". The high demand for the essays led to their publication in a more permanent form. On January 1, 1788,
24624-413: The relation between Church and State speaks of a 'wall of separation', not of a fine line easily overstepped. ... 'The great American principle of eternal separation'— Elihu Root 's phrase bears repetition—is one of the vital reliances of our Constitutional system for assuring unities among our people stronger than our diversities. It is the Court's duty to enforce this principle in its full integrity." In
24795-523: The religious practices of any majority or minority sect. The First Amendment, by its "establishment" clause, prevents, of course, the selection by government of an "official" church. Yet the ban plainly extends farther than that. We said in Everson v. Board of Education , 330 U. S. 1, 330 U. S. 16, that it would be an "establishment" of a religion if the Government financed one church or several churches. For what better way to "establish" an institution than to find
24966-447: The right to speak and the right to refrain from speaking are complementary components of a broader concept of individual freedom of mind, so also the individual's freedom to choose his own creed is the counterpart of his right to refrain from accepting the creed established by the majority. At one time, it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for
25137-487: The rights of religion and the civil authority... entire abstinence of the government" (1832 letter Rev. Adams), and "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government as essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States" (1811 letter to Baptist Churches). In Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), the Supreme Court ruled that government may not "excessively entangle" with religion. The case involved two Pennsylvania laws: one permitting
25308-490: The same winter-holiday season , which has attained a secular status in our society." In Lynch v. Donnelly the Supreme Court also developed with the endorsement test a further test to determine the constitutionality under the Establishment Clause of certain government actions. In 2001, Roy Moore , then Chief Justice of Alabama , installed a monument to the Ten Commandments in the state judicial building. In 2003, he
25479-406: The same case made it also clear that state governments and the federal government are prohibited from passing laws or imposing requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, as well as aiding those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs. In Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet (1994),
25650-470: The school prayer cases of the early 1960s Engel v. Vitale and Abington School District v. Schempp , aid seemed irrelevant. The Court ruled on the basis that a legitimate action both served a secular purpose and did not primarily assist religion. In Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York (1970), the Court ruled that a legitimate action could not entangle government with religion. In Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), these points were combined into
25821-422: The sentence "The freedom of the press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotic Governments." Eight of the other twelve states made similar pledges. However, these declarations were generally considered "mere admonitions to state legislatures", rather than enforceable provisions. After several years of comparatively weak government under the Articles of Confederation ,
25992-464: The separation of church and state: "No perfect or absolute separation is really possible; the very existence of the Religion Clauses is an involvement of sorts—one that seeks to mark boundaries to avoid excessive entanglement." He also coined the term "benevolent neutrality" as a combination of neutrality and accommodationism in Walz to characterize a way to ensure that there is no conflict between
26163-442: The series. Jay also distilled his case into a pamphlet in the spring of 1788, An Address to the People of the State of New-York ; Hamilton cited it approvingly in Federalist No. 85 . James Madison, present in New York as a Virginia delegate to the Confederation Congress, was recruited by Hamilton and Jay and became Hamilton's primary collaborator. Gouverneur Morris and William Duer were also considered. However, Morris turned down
26334-467: The state to "purchase" services in secular fields from religious schools, and the other permitting the state to pay a percentage of the salaries of private school teachers, including teachers in religious institutions. The Supreme Court found that the government was "excessively entangled" with religion, and invalidated the statutes in question. The excessive entanglement test, together with the secular purpose and primary effect tests thereafter became known as
26505-461: The states the same limitations the First Amendment had always imposed on the Congress. This "elementary proposition of law" was confirmed and endorsed time and time again in cases like Cantwell v. Connecticut , 310 U. S. 296, 303 (1940) and Wooley v. Maynard (1977). The central liberty that unifies the various clauses in the First Amendment is the individual's freedom of conscience : Just as
26676-427: The subsequent articles: Furtwangler notes that as the series grew, this plan was somewhat changed. The fourth topic expanded into detailed coverage of the individual articles of the Constitution and the institutions it mandated, while the two last topics were merely touched on in the last essay. The papers can be broken down by author as well as by topic. At the start of the series, all three authors were contributing;
26847-492: The tension of competing values, each constitutionally respectable, but none open to realization to the logical limit." The National Constitution Center observes that, absent some common interpretations by jurists, the precise meaning of the Establishment Clause is unclear and that decisions by the United Supreme Court relating to the Establishment Clause often are by 5–4 votes. The Establishment Clause, however, reflects
27018-519: The three men. Hamilton, who had been a leading advocate of national constitutional reform throughout the 1780s and was one of the three representatives for New York at the Constitutional Convention , in 1789 became the first secretary of the treasury , a post he held until his resignation in 1795. Madison, who is now acknowledged as the father of the Constitution — despite his repeated rejection of this honor during his lifetime, became
27189-401: The time of publication, the authors of The Federalist Papers attempted to hide their identities due to Hamilton and Madison having attended the convention. Astute observers, however, correctly discerned the identities of Hamilton, Madison, and Jay. Establishing authorial authenticity of the essays that constitute The Federalist Papers has not always been clear. After Hamilton's death in 1804,
27360-542: The time of the First Amendment's adoption and that James Madison , not Jefferson, was the principal drafter. However, Madison himself often wrote of "perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters" (1822 letter to Livingston), which means the authority of the church (that which comes from the church) is decided by church authority, and that which is decided in civil government is decided by civil authorities; neither may decree law or policy in each other's realm. Another description reads: "line of separation between
27531-509: The variety who through divisive appeals would aim at tyranny. The Federalist begins and ends with this issue. In the final paper Hamilton offers "a lesson of moderation to all sincere lovers of the Union, and ought to put them on their guard against hazarding anarchy, civil war, a perpetual alienation of the States from each other, and perhaps the military despotism of a successful demagogue". The matter
27702-514: The wall of separation has been breached. Everson laid down the test that establishment existed when aid was given to religion, but that the transportation was justifiable because the benefit to the children was more important. Felix Frankfurter called in his concurrence opinion in McCollum v. Board of Education (1948) for a strict separation between state and church: "Separation means separation, not something less. Jefferson's metaphor in describing
27873-675: The words Gloria in Excelsis Deo , the words sung by the angels at the Nativity ( Luke 2:14 in the Latin Vulgate translation). At the same time, the Allegheny County Court upheld the display of a nearby menorah , which appeared along with a Christmas tree and a sign saluting liberty, reasoning that "the combined display of the tree, the sign, and the menorah ... simply recognizes that both Christmas and Hanukkah are part of
28044-420: Was a cut above ' Caesar ' or ' Brutus ' or even ' Cato '. Publius Valerius helped found the ancient republic of Rome. His more famous name, Publicola, meant 'friend of the people'." Hamilton had applied this pseudonym to three letters in 1778, in which he attacked fellow Federalist Samuel Chase and revealed that Chase had taken advantage of knowledge gained in Congress to try to dominate the flour market. At
28215-473: Was consulted by Chief Justice Morrison Waite in Reynolds regarding the views on establishment by the Founding Fathers . Bancroft advised Waite to consult Jefferson and Waite then discovered the above quoted letter in a library after skimming through the index to Jefferson's collected works according to historian Don Drakeman. The Establishment Clause forbids federal, state, and local laws whose purpose
28386-543: Was further clarified by the Ninth Amendment . Federal judges, when interpreting the Constitution, frequently use The Federalist Papers as a contemporary account of the intentions of the framers and ratifiers. They have been applied on issues ranging from the power of the federal government in foreign affairs (in Hines v. Davidowitz ) to the validity of ex post facto laws (in the 1798 decision Calder v. Bull , apparently
28557-523: Was held that in both cases, the state unconstitutionally provided aid to religious organizations. The ruling was partially reversed in Mueller v. Allen (1983). There, the Court upheld a Minnesota statute permitting the use of tax revenues to reimburse parents of students. The Court noted that the Minnesota statute granted such aid to parents of all students, whether they attended public or private schools. While
28728-528: Was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State'. ... That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach. Citing Justice Hugo Black in Torcaso v. Watkins (1961) the Supreme Court repeated its statement from Everson v. Board of Education (1947) in Abington School District v. Schempp (1963): We repeat and again reaffirm that neither
28899-432: Was ordered in the case of Glassroth v. Moore by a federal judge to remove the monument, but he refused to comply, ultimately leading to his removal from office. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, allowing the lower court's decision to stand. On March 2, 2005, the Supreme Court heard arguments for two cases involving religious displays, Van Orden v. Perry and McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky . These were
29070-468: Was proposed to assuage Anti-Federalist opposition to Constitutional ratification . Initially, the First Amendment applied only to laws enacted by the Congress , and many of its provisions were interpreted more narrowly than they are today. Beginning with Gitlow v. New York (1925), the Supreme Court applied the First Amendment to states—a process known as incorporation —through the Due Process Clause of
29241-411: Was provided by Hamilton who, in the days before his ultimately fatal gun duel with Aaron Burr , provided his lawyer with a list detailing the author of each number. This list credited Hamilton with a full 63 of the essays (three of those being jointly written with Madison), almost three-quarters of the whole, and was used as the basis for an 1810 printing that was the first to make specific attribution for
#163836