This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Brent, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Principal-Agent Analysis of U.S. Courts of Appeals Responses to Boerne V. Flores

San Jose State University

Using principal-agent theory, Brent found that support for claimants before the U.S. Courts of Appeals in religious free exercise cases declined following the Supreme Court's decision in Employment Division, Department of Human Resources v. Smith and rose again following congressional passage of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The present study attempts to determine how the Courts of Appeals responded to the Supreme Court's decision in Boerne v. Flores that RFRA was unconstitutional. A multivariate analysis controlling on political and case-fact variables reveals that support for free exercise claimants did decline again following the Boerne decision. The Supreme Court apparently succeeded in reestablishing itself as the relevant principal in free exercise cases.

Key Words: principal-agent • RFRA • Boerne v. Flores • free exercise • compelling interest

American Politics Research, Vol. 31, No. 5, 557-570 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X032551700


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?