Contesting Religious Freedom: Impossibility, Normativity, and Justice

Scholars of religion have in recent years enriched legal and political debates regarding religious freedom by bringing the findings of religious studies to bear on these debates. Among those who have done most to bring the discourse of religious studies into legal scholarship, Winnifred Fallers Sullivan has made an influential argument that religious freedom is impossible. Careful attention to this argument suggests, however, that her contribution to the dialogue between religious studies and law involves deeply held normative commitments that are not always sufficiently articulated. Her contention that religious freedom is impossible is intelligible only as a moral conviction. Sullivan has not demonstrated that religious freedom is impossible; instead, she has argued that it is unjust. Making this implicit normative conviction explicit allows a more comprehensive and open discussion of religious freedom in contemporary society.