I postulate that there is a divorce between the Free Exercise Clause of the Unite States Constitution and the freedom it sought to protect. Consequently, we have a polity besieged by diminishing freedoms and fear, which inadvertently manifests as intolerance. The thesis utilizes historical responses to antithetical ideologies like communism and polygamy to draw a parallel between the ugly past and terrorism; and to highlight a fundamental ideological lapse in the prosecution of the war on terror. A case Study of the Al-Qaeda Terrorist Organization revealed that it is a fully functional organization, albeit clandestine, that embodies the elements of public administration and the ability to set goals and coordinate resources for the fulfillment of specific terrorist goals. Some have viewed religion as an endless good, yet it remains a significant source of socio-cultural schism in the society. Mere toleration and the use of contemporary law are insufficient to dispel the dangers posed by radical Islamists. The violence and tension among various faiths are exacerbated by three dominant factors: first, the uncanny inclination of people toward political correctness; second, an inherent loophole in the Free exercise Clause; third and paramount is subversive religious doctrines. Also, apathy, complacency and a degree of religious naiveté in the polity all play into the rising religious disquietude. The thesis concludes that Free Exercise Clause is under attack and that terrorism and extremism are the bane of subversive religious injunctions. Suggestions are offered in the conclusion. / Department of Political Science

The right to be let alone has been developing throughout history to offset the seemingly relentless encroachments by government in efforts to regulate "morality," and by governmental and/or business uses of technological advancements to control the individuals privacy. Thus, the espoused constitutional right of privacy has come to be the way for individuals (and groups) to stave off society's attempts to control or divert the individual from his right to be let alone. This work examines both state and federal court cases in an attempt to show that privacy has come to be a basic, constitutional right to be used against society's intrusions in areas of personal and sexual privacy.

La philosophie politique de Leo Strauss a inspiré aux États-Unis des disciples bien au-delà des départements de philosophie. En créant une communauté de conversation, les « straussiens » ont insufflé à l’étude et à l’activité politique un style de pensée irréductible aux sensibilités libérale et conservatrice contemporaines, bien qu'ils aient principalement choisi de dialoguer avec le conservatisme politique naissant. Le conservatisme lincolnien qu’ils ont adopté en est une version modérée par le rationalisme du premier constitutionalisme américain et trouve son origine dans la réhabilitation polémique de la science politique aristotélicienne. En effet, cette science politique les a conduit à interpréter le constitutionalisme à la lumière des principes des pères fondateurs de la République américaine. / The Political Philosophy of Leo Strauss has a far wider sphere of influence in America than the departments of Philosophy. By creating their own community of conversation, the “straussians” inflected to study and political activity a style of thought beyond contemporary liberalism and conservatism, even if Straussians mainly chose to converse with new born political conservatism. The lincolnian conservatism they embraced is one moderated by the rationalism of the first American constitutionalism, and has foundings in the reenforcement of the aristotelician political science. This Political Science led them to read the constitutionalism thanks to the principles of the Founding Fathers of the American Republic.

The purpose of the study was to determine how the Fourth Amendment is treated in the age of the internet. To determine the degree of the significance of this relationship a comparative approach is used. Court opinions from cases involving other technological innovations and the Fourth Amendment were examined and their reasoning was compared to that of cases involving the internet and the Fourth Amendment. The results indicated that contrary to some fears that the internet would require a different approach with respect to the law it actually did not present many novel barriers to its application. The principle conclusion was that the reasoning used in cases involving older technologies, namely the test outlined in Katz v. United States, was consistently applied even in the age of the internet.

Same-sex marriage is a subject that has been heavily discussed and argued since the concept of marriage came into existence. Marriage is a relationship that most American citizens are entitled to although it is not yet a fundamental right. As of a very recent court decision, Strawser v. Strange, Civil Action No. 14-0424-CG-C1 finalized on February 9, 2015, Alabama has legalized same-sex marriage; furthermore, thirty-seven states now recognize the legality of same-sex marriage. Marriage, whether it is between a heterosexual or a homosexual couple, should be a fundamental right enjoyed by all. This thesis will explain why same-sex marriage should be a fundamental right. The research presented in this thesis will be scrutinized and thoroughly examined showing the obstacles that same-sex couples face when wanting to legally marry. The United States Constitution, the Due Process Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause will be analyzed and discussed to prove that all fifty states should allow same-sex couples to wed. Citizens view what constitutes a marriage differently depending on their upbringing and residence. This thesis will illustrate why same-sex marriage has been such a widely discussed topic, and it will investigate the influence of religion and the church. Historically, the tradition of marriage has always been between one man and one woman. By examining how the tradition of marriage is changing and using case law decisions, an argument can be formed that marriage should be a fundamental right for all people.

Not available / text

L’examen des conceptions exposées par certains représentants politiques et institutionnels conservateurs influents dans le Colorado suite aux élections de mi-mandat en 2006 révèle l’existence d’une rhétorique fondée sur la juxtaposition de deux thèmes fondateurs : les vertus de l’économie de marché et les enseignements de la tradition, auxquels s’ajoute l’adhésion à une politique de défense vigoureuse. En réalité, cette triple thématique constitue l’essence même du discours façonné par William F. Buckley Jr. et Frank S. Meyer dans le magazine National Review à partir de 1955. Buckley et Meyer procédèrent, en effet, au renouvellement de la philosophie conservatrice par la fusion du libéralisme classique et du traditionalisme tels que ces deux courants de pensée apparurent isolément aux Etats-Unis à la fin de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale en réaction au communisme et au New Deal.L’existence d’un discours fusionniste dans le Colorado soulève des interrogations sur la validité de deux théories connexes qui animent méthodologiquement l’interprétation de l’évolution du conservatisme américain. La première théorie voit dans le message conservateur fusionniste des incohérences philosophiques et programmatiques qui annoncent l’atomisation des composantes théoriques de ce message et, consécutivement, aussi bien la disparition du conservatisme sous sa forme actuelle que la recomposition, à terme, des appartenances partisanes aux Etats-Unis. La deuxième théorie soutient que ces incompatibilités et ces risques de fracture se manifestent géographiquement à travers une opposition politico-culturelle entre le conservatisme de l’Ouest non-côtier, auquel l’analyse prête des caractéristiques individualistes, et celui du Sud, décrit comme fidèle à des valeurs traditionnelles et religieuses perçues comme une entrave aux aspirations individualistes.L’objectif de cette étude est de vérifier l’hypothèse de cette dichotomie philosophique et régionale et porte sur l’Arizona et le Colorado, les deux Etats les plus représentatifs de l’Ouest non-côtier. / Comments made by some of Colorado’s most influential conservative leaders in the wake of the 2006 mid-term elections reveal the extent to which the type of conservatism that they advocate rests on three basic principles: free enterprise, tradition, and strong national defense. It turns out that this brand of conservatism coincides with the political philosophy which William F. Buckley Jr. and Frank S. Meyer sought to formulate in National Review starting in 1955 when the magazine was first published. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, Buckley and Meyer actually set out to modernize intellectual conservatism by fusing together into a coherent doctrine the principles of classical liberalism and traditionalism that separately emerged in the United States at the end of World War Two in reaction to international communism and the New Deal. The manifestation of “fusionist” conservatism in Colorado in 2006 raises serious questions about the validity of two interrelated theories which methodologically steer studies of modern conservatism in the United States. The first theory holds that American conservatism in its current expression is philosophically incoherent and will ultimately disintegrate paving the way for a major partisan realignment. The second theory contends that such internal tensions are reflected in sectional cultural and political discrepancies between the Interior West, typically described as libertarian, and the South, generally seen as solidly clinging to traditional and religious values which are purportedly at odds with more individualistic aspirations. The purpose of this study is to test the hypothesis of philosophical and sectional strains within American conservatism and focuses on Arizona and Colorado, two of the fastest-growing states in the Interior West since the end of World War Two.

Electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes was largely unregulated prior to 1978. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (hereinafter "FISA") was enacted to implement a judicial authorization process for foreign intelligence electronic surveillance that would effectively balance competing needs for national security and civil liberty under the Fourth Amendment. This study examines the evolution of FISA and its effectiveness under the Fourth Amendment, as assessed by federal reviewing courts and scholars since the statute's enactment. The study concludes that the FISA electronic surveillance authorization process has been effective in providing a constitutional mechanism to obtain foreign intelligence information.

Following his election to the office of President of the United States, in 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt began his attempt to overcome the economic difficulties caused by the depression of 1929. His program for recovery included the enactment by Congress of many new pieces of legistlation. A great amount of this legislation was ruled out by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Subsequently, the President on February 5, 1937, presented a proposal to alter the court system of the United States. This proposal brought forth a surge of public opinion throughout the nation. Sharp divisions of opinion occurred concerning the merits of the President's suggested reform The purpose of this study to dermine, (1) the reactions of the electorate to the proposal; (2) the reactions of the various agencies of public opinion; (3) wheather these agency reactions were cuases or effects of public feeling; (4) the importance of public opinion in such a matter.