Hugh Hewitt’s web site

has an excellent discussion of the Constitution’s bar on religious tests for office, and how the Senate Democrats have tried to impose such a test on President Bush’s judicial nominees. In addition to the material Hugh posted on the subject today, check out the short history of the Tests Clause that he provided on August 1.
Hugh also links to Boyden Gray’s letter to the Washington Post on the subject. Gray responds to an op-ed piece in the Post by Richard Cohen attacking his role in running an advertisement that pointed out the anti-Catholic litmus test the Senate Democrats seeks to impose. It was the Cohen piece that got me started on this subject. Gray reminds us that “it was the Democratic Senate opposition — and not the Committee for Justice’s ad campaign — that injected religion into the Pryor debate, suggesting a litmus test that would allow the Democrats to block (by filibuster if necessary) any person of faith they choose.”
I am also heartened by the following statement from the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, quoted in Gray’s letter to the Post: “We are profoundly troubled by the manner in which this opposition [to William Pryor] has been framed. . . . We are deeply troubled by those who have implied that a person of faith cannot serve in a high-level government post that may raise issues at odds with his or her personal beliefs.”

Responses

Books to read from Power Line