Frederick W. Claybrook Jr. is an Attorney at Claybrook LLC.
Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence, Independence Institute
Professor Robert G. Natelson is a constitutional scholar and author.
Rob’s constitutional scholarship has been cited repeatedly by justices and parties at the U.S. Supreme Court—as well as by federal appeals courts, and at least 18 state supreme courts.
Rob’s research into the Constitution’s original meaning has carried him to libraries throughout the United States and in Britain, including four months at Oxford University. His books and articles span many different parts of the Constitution, including groundbreaking studies of the Necessary and Proper Clause, the Indian Commerce Clause, federalism, Founding-Era interpretation, regulation of elections, and the amendment process of Article V. He created the first-ever online bibliography for 18th century materials used in constitutional research. He is a contributing author to the Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court of the United States (on Magna Carta). He contributed eight essays to the third edition of the Heritage Guide to the Constitution: five on the amendment procedure and one each on the Guarantee Clause, the Postal Clause, and the Recess Appointments Clause.
U.S. Supreme Court justices have relied explicitly on Rob’s research in 41 citations in 13 separate cases.
UC Foundation Assistant Professor, U.T. Chattanooga
R. B. Price and Isabelle Wade & Paul C. Lyda Professor Emeritus of Law, University of Missouri School of Law
Carl H. Esbeck is R.B. Price Professor and Isabelle Wade & Paul C. Lyda Professor of Law emeritus at the University of Missouri. After attending Cornell University School of Law where he served as an editor on the Cornell Law Review, he held a judicial clerkship with the Honorable Howard C. Bratton, chief judge of the U.S. District Court in New Mexico.
Professor Esbeck publishes widely in the area of religious liberty and church-state relations. He is recognized as the progenitor of "Charitable Choice," an integral part of the 1996 Federal Welfare Reform Act, later made a part of the faith-based initiative and equal-treatment regulations under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. In addition, he has taken the lead in recognizing that the modern Supreme Court has applied the Establishment Clause not as a personal right, but as a structural limit on the government's authority in disputes involving church governance. While on leave from 1999 to 2002, Professor Esbeck directed the Center for Law & Religious Freedom (CLRF) and later served as Senior Counsel to the Deputy Attorney General at the U.S. Department of Justice. While directing the CLRF, Professor Esbeck was a central part of the congressional advocacy behind the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). While at the Department of Justice one of his duties was to direct a task force to remove barriers to the equal-treatment of faith-based organizations applying for social service grants. He is the author of Disestablishment and Religious Dissent: Church-State Relations in the New American States, 1776 - 1833 (U. of MO Press, 2019).
Religious Liberty in the States
Dayton Lawyers Chapter
Dayton, OHThe Time Is Ripe to Disincorporate the Establishment Clause
Frederick W. Claybrook
The Supreme Court’s 1947 incorporation of the Establishment Clause[1] through the Due Process Clause of...
The False Doctrine of Inherent Sovereign Authority
Robert G. Natelson
This essay examines the hypothesis that the federal government and its departments and officials hold...
How the Founders’ Natural Law Theory Illuminates the Original Meaning of Free Exercise
Kody Cooper
In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, the Supreme Court will consider whether Philadelphia’s 2018 policy...
The Establishment Clause: Its Original Public Meaning and What We Can Learn From the Plain Text
Carl H. Esbeck
Modern times in church-state relations began in 1947 with the Supreme Court’s decision in Everson...
Topics
What Is The Best Way to Deal With Increasing Disputes over Religious Liberty?
Last term, the Supreme Court addressed several religious liberty-related matters in Bostock v. Clayton County,...