¶ … First Amendment Shutting Mosques, Trump and First Amendment

The proposal by trump, at its very core, would seek to sanction a religious institution by virtue of the adherence of its members to certain religious beliefs. Indeed, this is exactly what the first amendment speaks against. The first amendment protects religious freedom and outlaws anything that would bar the free exercise of one's religion of choice. It is referred to as the Free Exercise Clause. Trump could say that he only sought to sanction the mosques that propagate what he refers to as radical Islam. However, he did not provide any evidence of activity or advocacy on any mosques.

The crucial right to religious freedom is enshrined in the U.S. constitution's first amendment. It states that Congress is bound not to make any law that respects establishment of a given religion or stops the free exercise of religious practice. The Free Exercise Clause, which is the latter half of the declaration guards religious freedom in various contexts. It bars the government from interfering with the religious practice of a group or an individual and further bars the government from targeting religious acts for circumscription (Dreisbach and Hall, 2009). Religious persons and groups are also provided with limited protection against laws that can be applied generally. This is also how the contraceptive mandate finds fault with the First Amendment.

Such a modified proposal would still not only be ineligible; based on the Free Exercise Clause but also in light of the Free Speech clause also enshrined in the First Amendment; which allows for stopping speech that is inciting with immediacy but not one that is simply widely controversial and that might trigger some violent act in future. Any talk that attempts to restrict the religious practice of Islam comes in direct conflict with the First Amendment (Dreisbach, Hall and Morrison, 2009).

The reason for the above observation...

Suffice to say, shutting down a mosque would obviously be unconstitutional. The issue of whether it is unconstitutional may also be determined by whether we apply the constitution as was intended by the crafting fathers or using it as mangled and twisted by the court systems.
Lawyer: plaintiffs- Muslim Mosque

In the event of attempt to close mosques, the resultant case would, most probably, have two parties; the government/the residency as defendants on one hand, and the mosques as the plaintiffs on the other hand. I will argue the case on behalf of the mosques in this paper.

Arguing for the Muslim Congregation

The First amendment clearly protects a number of basic liberties, i.e. freedom of speech, freedom of religion, press freedom, freedom to petition and freedom of assembly. The interpretation of the limits of the First amendment has proven to be a hard task. Many cases have made attempts to define the scope of the freedoms. Indeed, the definition of the First Amendment has also evolved through the history of America. It has not ended. The freedom of religion is catered for in two clauses in the constitution. There is the establishment Clause that bars the government from starting an official church, and the Free Exercise Clause that allows freedom of worship (Dreisbach et al., 2009). It is notable that the phrase on separation of the state and the church does not…