An article from the Fall 2007 symposium issue of the West Virginia Law Review, Volume 110, on “The Religion Clauses in the 21st Century.” The symposium was convened by the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy and the West Virginia University College of Law on October April 12 and 13, 2007.

Douglas Laycock, Yale Kamisar College Professor of Law, The University of Michigan, wrote on “Substantive Neutrality Revisited.” “Douglas Laycock’s paper [from his featured symposium address on the topic] narrates the history of one of his best-known ideas and defends it against alternative proposals made by Steven Gey and Noah Feldman. The norm of substantive neutrality directs that government should seek to systematically minimize its impact on private religious choices, and Laycock contends that it offers a coherent and normatively attractive approach to issues of church and state. He further argues that substantive neutrality can largely explain the votes of median Justices Kennedy and O’Connor and consequently can explain much of the Rehnquist Court’s approach to the Establishment Clause (if not the Free Exercise Clause).”
- From Introduction by William P. Marshall, Vivian E. Hamilton and John E. Taylor.