Nathan S. Chapman is the Pope F. Brock Associate Professor of Professional Responsibility at the University f Georgia School of Law, and a McDonald Distinguished Fellow of Law and Religion at the Emory Center for Law and Religion. He was formerly the Executive Director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center.Michael W. McConnell is the Richard and Frances Mallery Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. From 2002 to 2009, he served as a Circuit Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He has argued sixteen cases in the United States Supreme Court, six of which involved the Religion Clauses. McConnell is also co-editor of Religion and the Constitution and Christian Perspectives on Legal Thought. His most recent book is The President Who Would Not Be King: Executive Power under the Constitution.

Chapman and McConnell take the reader on an illuminating journey through British and early American establishments, relevant developments in the nineteenth century, and eight decades of modern Establishment Clause interpretation. Building on a well-articulated view of the clause's animating values, they argue that a jurisprudence rooted in history will yield greater religious liberty and pluralism. Agreeing to Disagree enters the constitutional discourse at an especially critical time now that the Supreme Court has moved into the uncharted interpretive territory of 'historical practices and understandings.'

• Introduction Part I: History 1. Establishment at the Founding 2. Framing the First Amendment 3. Disestablishment in the States 4. Application of the Establishment Clause to the States Part II: Modern Controversies 5. The Rise and Fall of the lemon Test 6. Accommodation of Religious Exercise 7. No-Aid Separation, Neutrality, and Religious Schools 8. Prayer, Bible Reading, and Coercion 9. Conflicts Over Symbols 10. Church Autonomy 11. Conclusion: Neutrality Beyond the Establishment Clause

Nathan S. Chapman is the Pope F. Brock Associate Professor of Professional Responsibility at the University f Georgia School of Law, and a McDonald Distinguished Fellow of Law and Religion at the Emory Center for Law and Religion. He was formerly the Executive Director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center.Michael W. McConnell is the Richard and Frances Mallery Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. From 2002 to 2009, he served as a Circuit Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He has argued sixteen cases in the United States Supreme Court, six of which involved the Religion Clauses. McConnell is also co-editor of Religion and the Constitution and Christian Perspectives on Legal Thought. His most recent book is The President Who Would Not Be King: Executive Power under the Constitution.

Chapman and McConnell take the reader on an illuminating journey through British and early American establishments, relevant developments in the nineteenth century, and eight decades of modern Establishment Clause interpretation. Building on a well-articulated view of the clause's animating values, they argue that a jurisprudence rooted in history will yield greater religious liberty and pluralism. Agreeing to Disagree enters the constitutional discourse at an especially critical time now that the Supreme Court has moved into the uncharted interpretive territory of 'historical practices and understandings.'

• Introduction Part I: History 1. Establishment at the Founding 2. Framing the First Amendment 3. Disestablishment in the States 4. Application of the Establishment Clause to the States Part II: Modern Controversies 5. The Rise and Fall of the lemon Test 6. Accommodation of Religious Exercise 7. No-Aid Separation, Neutrality, and Religious Schools 8. Prayer, Bible Reading, and Coercion 9. Conflicts Over Symbols 10. Church Autonomy 11. Conclusion: Neutrality Beyond the Establishment Clause