This essay addresses the Supreme Court's three-part establishment clause test originally set down in Lemon v. Kurtzman. Part I concerns the manner in which the Lemon test has substantially evolved. Part II explores what the evolved test has to offer by way of solving the seemingly conflicting duties not to inhibit free speech and political rights, while at the same time refraining from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion." Finally, Part III addresses some of the proposals to supplant Lemon altogether.
Carl H. Esbeck, The Lemon Test: Should It Be Retained, Reformulate or Rejected?, 4 Notre Dame J.L. Ethics & Pub. Pol'y 513 (1990)