This Comment will argue that what has been flying under the banner of "postmodernism" is actually an intensification of modem paradigms. Moreover, hyper-modernism is not a friend to religious freedom. Instead, the Court held in Martinez that the ideologies of "diversity," "non-discrimination," and "non-commitment" trump religious freedom.' Postmodernists and Christians alike should find this objectionable. Additionally, the Martinez decision raises serious questions about the socalled rise of postmodern thought and its impact, at least in the minds of all nine Supreme Court justices. This decision may only mark the beginning of a rise in hyper-modern Religion Clause jurisprudence. At the outset, it is helpful to provide a background to modernism and postmodernism and their impact on religious freedom.
Timothy P. Lendino, From Rosenberger to Martinez: Why the Rise of Hyper-Modernism is a Bad Thing for Religious Freedom, 33 Campbell L. Rev. 699 (2011).