Religious Lawfare

Andrés Constantin, S.J.D. (2023), Georgetown University Law Center, is Scholar at the O'Neill Institute, Visiting Professor at Universidad Torcuato Di Tella, and Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University. He has published academic works on human rights, global and public health law.

• AcknowledgementsFiguresIntroduction1 The Contours2 Approach and Perspective3 The Structure4 The Exploration1 Religious Lawfare: a Challenge to Liberal Democracies1 The Point of Departure1.1 Populism as a Challenge to Cosmopolitanism1.2 The Rise of Conservative Religious Groups1.3 Conservative Religious Groups Gaining Power2 Assertive Multiculturalism: a Theory3 Conservative Religious Movements and the Future of Liberal Democracies4 Conclusion2 Waging Religious Lawfare through Conscience-Based Claims1 Religious Lawfare and Conscience-Based Claims2 The Juridification of Conscience2.1 History and Origins2.2 Conscientious Objection as a Legal Right2.3 Juridifying Conscience3 Conscience-Based Claims as Theocratization Tools4 Religious Lawfare in Healthcare5 Conclusion3 Religious Lawfare: a Threat to Democracy and Human Rights1 Political Uses of Conscience-Based Claims2 Coercion, Democracy and Conscience3 Political Uses of Conscience-Based Claims Are Harmful4 Conclusion4 Legal Efforts to Counter Religious Lawfare1 Countering Religious Lawfare: Universal Human Rights System2 Countering Religious Lawfare: Regional Human Rights Systems2.1 European Human Rights System2.2 Inter-American Human Rights System2.3 African Human Rights System3 Conclusion5 Religious Lawfare at Play: Conscientious Objection in Healthcare1 Conscience-Based Claims to the Provision of Healthcare Services2 Dealing with “Vertical Expansions” of Conscience-Based Claims2.1 The Need to Limit Conscientious Objection in Healthcare2.2 Dealing with Conscientious Objection in Healthcare beyond Human Rights Standards2.3 A Model Regulation of Conscientious Objection in Healthcare3 Dealing with “Horizontal Expansions” of Conscience-Based Claims3.1 Views on Institutional Conscientious Objection3.2 Institutional Conscientious Objection through Comparative Law Lens3.3 Healthcare, Institutions and Role of the State4 Conclusion6 A Path Forward: Mitigating the Impact of Religious Lawfare1 The Need for a New Normative Basis1.1 From Non-interference to Non-domination1.2 Freedom as Non-domination and New Uses of Conscience-based Claims 2 A Path Forward for Conscience-Based Claims and for Liberal Democracies3 ConclusionConclusionTable of CasesTable of InstrumentsBibliographyIndex