Samuel Alito’s Version of Religious Liberty

In July, 2022, U.S. Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito gave a speech at the Religious Liberty Summit in Rome, Italy. The speech received some media attention, much of which I believe missed the main noteworthy elements of the speech. To me, the speech displays some elementary misconceptions about freedom of religion. I examine these misconceptions in another post.

Justice Alito’s speech was was 5000 words, so I think it is useful to see a version condensed to about a page, Perhaps the condensed version will better allow readers to see the leaps of logic and omissions of fact. I took a transcription of the speech by Eugene Volokh, split it into paragraphs, and then summarized the paragraphs, one sentence per paragraph. You can check the attached file (bottom of post) with original text to judge if I give a fair synopsis.

Summary of Alito Speech

Thanking organizers of summit on religious liberty.
US has struggled but finally achieved a free society that protects diverse beliefs.
History of Rome shows that human advances, such as religious liberty, are fragile.
Romans had Christians torn by wild beasts in the Colosseum, among many other atrocities.
Religion is under attack today by Muslims, Hindus, Communists, and others.
Religious persecution probably comes from mistrust of the Other…
…but I don’t know that much about poor countries where these abuses now occur.

Religious liberty in rich countries threatened by ignorance of, and hostility to, religion.
Most legal academics think religion shouldn’t have more protection than a hobby.
Let’s compare freedom of sports fandom to freedom of religion.
Suppose someone whose life revolves around sports fandom wants to wear his team hat to court, where it is not allowed.
1st Amendment protects a religious insistence on a head covering, but not the fan, despite my colleagues not being so sure.

But what is the basis for this Constitutional freedom?
Declaration of Independence traces rights to  our Creator, but that won’t impress atheists.
Same problem exists in justifying freedom of religion proclaimed in international law.
International rights not based on particular revelation, philosophy, or tradition.
International rights based on survey of various national constitutions.
Religious liberty is not absolute; child sacrifice would not be protected.
European Convention lists values that might take precedence over religious liberty.
A judge could use such values to shrink religious liberty to only include private worship.
Some countries have narrowed liberty of religious speech, but I don’t want to interfere in affairs of other national legal systems…
…even though many international leaders have been criticizing my abortion decision.

How do we protect religious liberty from indifference and hostility of unreligious?
Religious liberty promotes domestic tranquility, as America has proven once we stopped discriminating against Mormons, Catholics, and Jews.
Non-religious people may also appreciate the charitable work of religions.
Philadelphia tried to hobble Catholic foster care even though Catholics invented orphanages.
Social reform often accomplished by religious leaders such as MLK.
Religious liberty helps protect other freedoms such as speech and assembly.
Liberal ideology of limited government comes from Catholic Church’s fight for freedom.
or instance, Pope John Paul II helped bring down the Soviet Union.

Religious liberty will only endure if people value it.
Optimistic story: despite government repression, Christianity is growing in China.
Humans need religion, so religion will always prevail.

Photo from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Peter’s_Basilica.