–Ashish Goel, Advocate, Supreme Court of India Earlier this year, a three-judge Bench of the Karnataka High Court (HC) decided that female Muslim students have no fundamental right to wear a headscarf inside government schools. Given the manner in which the Petitioners put forth their arguments and given the dominance that the ‘essential religious practices’
—Renáta Uitz, Central European University [Editor’s note: This is one of our biweekly I-CONnect columns. Columns, while scholarly in accordance with the tone of the blog and about the same length as a normal blog post, are a bit more “op-ed” in nature than standard posts. For more information about our four columnists for 2018,
—Juliano Zaiden Benvindo & Fábio Almeida, University of Brasília On September 27, the Brazilian Supreme Court arguably decided the most important case on religious freedom and education rights in Brazilian history. Under scrutiny was whether religious freedom (Art. 5, VI, of the Brazilian Constitution) and religious education (Art. 210, Paragraph 1, of the Brazilian Constitution)
The Supreme Court of Canada on Religious Freedom and Education: Loyola High School v. Québec (Attorney General)
—Benjamin L. Berger, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University The classroom has been a contemporary crucible for working out the relationship between religion and the modern constitutional state. Whether the issue has been the crucifix on classroom walls in Italy, the pledge of allegiance in U.S. schools, the religious (or was it ethnic?) identity of
–Antonios Kouroutakis, Oxford University [Editor’s Note: This is the second of two scholarly perspectives published on I-CONnect this week this week on S.A.S. v. France. The first was published here on Wednesday, July 9.] How to balance individual rights with the state intervention to accommodate the interests of the society as whole is an inherently difficult question.
—Ioanna Tourkochoriti, Fellow, The Walker Institute for Area Studies and The Rule of Law Collaborative, University of South Carolina [Editor’s Note: This is the first of two scholarly perspectives that I-CONnect will publish this week on S.A.S. v. France. The second will be published on Friday, July 11.] In S.A.S. v. France, the European Court of Human Rights
—Timothy Zick, William & Mary Law School In my forthcoming book, The Cosmopolitan First Amendment (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013—Part I of the book is available here), I discuss the manner in which the First Amendment’s various guarantees relate to and intersect with international borders. The book takes an extended and systematic look at what might