Paulsen on "The Most Important Religious Liberty Case of the Past Thirty Years

My friend Mike Paulsen makes a powerful case, here, at Public Discourse, for the high-importance of the Court's 1981 Widmar decision.  As he points out, Widmar formed the basis for the Court's repeated rejection -- between 1981 and the Court's Zelman decision -- of the claim that the Establishment Clause generally requires discrimination against private religious speakers, speech, and activity:

Widmar thus broke the Establishment Clause logjam that had become a barrier to true religious freedom. The former skewed thinking--that separation required discrimination--began to give way. Much as Brown v. Board of Education had broken the back of separate-but-equal state racial segregation a generation earlier, Widmar broke the back of separate-and-unequal official religious discrimination. . . .

. . . Despite exceptions and odd departures, Widmar states the bedrock rules: The Free Speech Clause forbids government from excluding or discriminating against private parties' religious expression because of its religious content. The Establishment Clause does not authorize or justify such discrimination, ever. Where government has provided a program or a benefit on a general basis, it may not exclude religious persons or groups on the basis of their religious expression or identity. It is hard to think of a better, more succinct statement of the essentials of religious freedom.