Theories
type: Ontology
creation date: 2026-08-01T18:02:07+00:00
imports: http://semantic-mediawiki.org/swivt/1.0

Freedom of Association/Philosophical Origins/Theories
type: Subject
type: Category:No breakout
type: Category:Philosophical Origins
type: Category:Theories
type: Category:Freedom of Association
page: https://www.rightspedia.org/Freedom_of_Association/Philosophical_Origins/Theories
wiki namespace: 0
wiki page content language: en
contents: In Roberts v. US Jaycees, the Supreme Court noted that US jurisprudence has created two constitutionally protected categories of association: expressive (e.g. interest groups and political parties) and intimate (e.g. friends and family). There is little originalism present in key expressive-association rulings. NAACP v. Alabama ([[Probable year:: 1959]]) , the first case where the Supreme Court held that a right to expressive association exists, did not draw on originalism. There is also little originalism present in the intimate-association jurisprudence, though it has been influenced by long-standing common-law ideas. The Supreme court established the idea of intimate association in Roberts, holding that it “has long recognized that, because the Bill of Rights is designed to secure individual liberty, it must afford the formation and preservation of certain kinds of highly personal relationships a substantial measure of sanctuary from unjustified interference by the State.” The majority opinion cites Meyers v. Nebraska ([[Probable year:: 1923]]) , a case that helped establish a right to make individual educational choices. The opinion cites old ideas going beyond education, stating that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees a right to “marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.” Though it does not embrace originalism, the ruling does invoke historical common-law understandings that may have existed when the Constitution was written. As Richard Boyd argues in “The Madisonian Paradox of Free Association,” America’s founders explicitly chose not to include free association in the Bill of Rights. James Madison, the primary author of the Bill of Rights, feared the influence of factions, which private associations furthered. Boyd writes that Madison viewed association as a “s…
page level: Question
probable year: 1923
probable year: 1959
probable year: 2008
probable year#aux: 2423420.5
probable year#aux: 2436569.5
probable year#aux: 2454466.5
question: Theories
question heading: What do the major legal theories (positive law, natural law, critical legal studies, etc.) say about this right?
right: Freedom of Association
section: Philosophical Origins
wiki page modification date: 2023-04-24T02:40:21Z
modification date#aux: 2460058.6113542
wiki page sort key: Freedom of Association/Philosophical Origins/Theories

Page name
type: ObjectProperty
page: https://www.rightspedia.org/Property-3APage_name
wiki namespace: 102
wiki page content language: en
wiki page sort key: Page name
type: wpg