- Associate Professor at the University of Mississippi School of Law
- Pro to the question "Should the Words “under God” Be in the US Pledge of Allegiance?"
“Many unfamiliar with the Supreme Court’s Establishment Clause doctrine would not have supposed that being required to listen to a phrase such as ‘under God’ would amount to a constitutional harm. And those same persons, when posed with the question of whether they believed the Pledge of Allegiance to be a religious exercise, would have probably answered ‘no.’ Thus Michael Newdow’s claim can be seen as doubly anomalous, resting on the feelings of a religious outsider when required to passively listen to a marginally religious message…
[T]he Establishment Clause should not be interpreted as requiring elimination of every religious message or practice. Demanding inclusion merely inverts the classifications of judicial winners and losers, but does little to promote the overall well-being of society’s members.”
Oregon Law Review, 2004
- Theoretical Expertise Ranking:
Individuals with JD's, or equivalent advanced degrees in fields relevant to government and constitutional law. Also top-level government officials (such as foreign leaders, US presidents, Founding Fathers, Supreme Court Justices, members of legislative bodies, cabinet members, military leaders, etc.) with positions relevant to government and constitutional law.
- Involvement and Affiliations:
- Associate Professor, University of Mississippi School of Law
- Co-Chair Elect, Law and Religion Section, Association of American Law Schools
- Former Associate, Knapp, Marsh, Jones and Doran, L.L.P.
- Judicial Clerk, Honorable Henry Lee Adams, Jr., United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
- JD, University of Southern California
- BA, University of California, Riverside
- None found
- Quoted in: