Abstract

The Religious Clauses’ doctrines have long been defined as «a farrago of unstable rules, tests, standards, principles, and exceptions». However, in recent times, the Roberts Court seems to have embraced a new judicial approach that, distancing itself from its precedents, has replaced the principle of neutrality with reference to the country’s history and traditions. Sometimes, this new approach has been judged exclusively as the result of the Supreme Court’s conservative turn. Nonetheless, a closer analysis reveals how it fits within a much longer and more complex process aimed at recovering some of the original features of the so-called American experiment