Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

But the original intent of the Constitution would be restored’

Catholic legal thought and the emergence of First Amendment originalism, 1947–87

Bibliographic Data

ID8302103
AuthorsDennis J Wieboldt (0000-0002-2036-3533, Law School & Department of History, University of Notre Dame , Notre Dame, IN 46556, corresponding author)
Year2026
Publication date2026-03-31
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Journal of Legal History (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0002-9319 • E-ISSN: 2161-797X
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/ajlh/njag002
OpenAlexW7147106507
LanguageEN

Several scholars of twentieth-century American legal history have recently argued that originalism—a method of constitutional interpretation commonly associated with the conservative legal movement—first emerged as southern Republicans and conservative Democrats (many of whom were evangelical Protestants) reacted to the US Supreme Court’s 1954 decision in Brown v Board of Education. But southern opponents of Brown were not the only figures to have self-consciously introduced originalist ways of thinking about the Constitution into the nation’s legal vocabulary at mid-century. Indeed, this article reveals that, nearly a decade before Brown, Catholics hundreds of miles away from Selma and Little Rock similarly sought to convince their neighbours that the Constitution ought to be understood according to the intentions of its eighteenth-century drafters (or, when appropriate, its nineteenth-century amenders). And importantly, they did so not to undermine the Civil Rights Movement, but rather to ensure that the Court’s 1947 decision in Everson v Board of Education would not stymie the American Catholic Church’s efforts to obtain public financial assistance for parochial schools. In encouraging jurists, scholars, and voters to understand the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses through the lens of founding-era history, post-Everson Catholics became as responsible as anyone outside of the Supreme Court for originalism’s decisive (re)shaping of the Religion Clauses during the next half-century. But this ultimately proved troubling to some as the conservative legal movement became ascendant in the 1980s. From the perspective of these critics of First Amendment originalism, God’s natural law, not Thomas Jefferson’s metaphorical ‘wall of separation’ between church and state, should determine the First Amendment’s meaning. In concluding, this article therefore suggests that Catholics initially turned to originalism pragmatically to vindicate their background philosophical and theological conceptions of religious liberty, but increasingly came to realize that originalism—to the extent that it relied on positivist assumptions about the nature of individual rights—was alone inadequate to do so

Constitution · Constitutionalism · Establishment Clause · First amendment · Free Exercise Clause · Interpretation (philosophy) · Original intent · Originalism · Supreme court · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Catholicism and Religious Studies · Legal and Constitutional Studies

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae