Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/31402
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | SMET, Stijn | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-07-03T14:06:09Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-07-03T14:06:09Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2020-07-03T12:30:12Z | - |
dc.identifier.citation | International and comparative law quarterly, 69 (3) , p. 611 -651 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0020-5893 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/31402 | - |
dc.description.abstract | When adjudicating religious disputes, constitutional courts often resort to a particular discursive register. The notions 'tolerance' and 'respect' are an integral part of this religion-specific constitutional register. But what do judges mean when they deploy the language of tolerance and respect? And what substantive role, if any, do both notions play in the constitutional interpretation of religious freedom? This article seeks to answer these conceptual and substantive questions by comparing constitutional case law on religious freedom from India, Israel and the United States. It also provides linkages to ongoing processes of (alleged) constitutional retrogression in the three jurisdictions. | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.publisher | CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS | - |
dc.rights | The author(s) 2020.Published by Cambridge University Press for the British Institute of International and Comparative Law | - |
dc.subject.other | Comparative law | - |
dc.subject.other | tolerance | - |
dc.subject.other | respect | - |
dc.subject.other | religious freedom | - |
dc.subject.other | constitutional interpretation | - |
dc.subject.other | India | - |
dc.subject.other | Israel | - |
dc.subject.other | United States | - |
dc.title | Comparative constitutional interpretation of religious freedom | - |
dc.type | Journal Contribution | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 651 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 3 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 611 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 69 | - |
local.bibliographicCitation.jcat | A1 | - |
local.publisher.place | EDINBURGH BLDG, SHAFTESBURY RD, CB2 8RU CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND | - |
local.type.refereed | Refereed | - |
local.type.specified | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1017/S0020589320000196 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000544944100005 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1471-6895 | - |
local.provider.type | CrossRef | - |
local.uhasselt.uhpub | yes | - |
item.contributor | SMET, Stijn | - |
item.accessRights | Open Access | - |
item.fulltext | With Fulltext | - |
item.fullcitation | SMET, Stijn (2020) Comparative constitutional interpretation of religious freedom. In: International and comparative law quarterly, 69 (3) , p. 611 -651. | - |
item.validation | ecoom 2021 | - |
crisitem.journal.issn | 0020-5893 | - |
crisitem.journal.eissn | 1471-6895 | - |
Appears in Collections: | Research publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
AM.pdf | Peer-reviewed author version | 709.07 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Page view(s)
72
checked on Sep 7, 2022
Download(s)
54
checked on Sep 7, 2022
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.