by Jared Zimmerman

Over the 2025 Fall Break, I had the wonderful opportunity to visit Rome while on my honeymoon. Other than the amazing food and enriching experiences with Italian culture, I was struck by the sheer number of churches throughout the city. Specifically, the number of churches constructed on sites once associated with Christian persecution and martyrdom. What had once been the scene of countless Christian martyrdoms, had now been transformed into a site of hope and thanksgiving. These sacred spaces stand as physical reminders that systems of violence and oppression are not immutable, but capable of redemption and renewal. Likewise, the American legal system, once a system used to justify horrors such as slavery and religious discrimination, can be transformed into a system that truly recognizes that everyone is created equal. Law, like history, reflects the values of those who interpret and apply it. Just as the early Christians transformed the Roman system of persecution and oppression, so too must we as law students and lawyers continue to guard and prevent the legal system from being used to further oppression and discrimination.

While there is a plethora of examples from ancient Rome, one of the most visible and well-known is the Colosseum. What had once been the grounds for innumerable Christian martyrs, executed for their faith to the cheers of a pagan society, was transformed into the Church of Santa Maria della Pietà al Colosseo in approximately the sixth or seventh century. Notably, on Good Friday the Pope leads the stations of the cross in and around the Colosseum, reclaiming a former site of violence as one of reflection and worship. This ritual serves as a powerful reminder that even the most brutal instruments of injustice can be reoriented toward truth, memory, and moral accountability.

Just as the early Christians transformed the Colosseum into a church, so too did Frederick Douglass shift the narrative that the Constitution was pro-slavery, into a fundamentally anti-slavery and pro-freedom document. Douglass went further and argued that when properly understood, the Constitution required  equality under the law. Douglass’s influential interpretation demonstrates that legal texts are not static, but depend upon the moral courage of those willing to challenge unjust readings of the law.

As the heirs of the early Christians and abolitionists, us law students and lawyers now have a duty to help transform the law and safeguard it from being corrupted into a tool of persecution and oppression. This does not require any of us to do the extraordinary, but only the ordinary, such as using our discretion for the betterment of the common good. Likewise, whenever we see an unjust law or even a just law which is being misused to harm another, we have a duty to speak out and to work toward justice through the legal system. This duty may take many forms, including advocating for reform through litigation or legislation, providing zealous and ethical representation to marginalized clients, and refusing to remain silent in the face of injustice. In doing so, we honor both the victims of past injustices and the promise of a legal system rooted in dignity, equality, and the rule of law.

Jared Zimmerman is a Murphy Scholar and 3L at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in the JD/CSMA program.

“Student Perspective” is a recurring blog series which highlights the various activities of the Murphy Scholar graduate students during their fellowship.

by Georgina Sugrue

This summer, I worked as a research assistant for Dean Greg Sisk, co-director of the Murphy Institute, analyzing data for his ongoing empirical study on religious liberty issues in the courts.  The study began in 1998 with a null hypothesis which states that partisan appointment has no effect on free exercise claims.  So far, the null hypothesis has prevailed, but the study continues as research is divided into ten-year increments. At this time, Sisk’s work is particularly interested in whether judges displayed more bias during years with high COVID-19 case counts. Our summer project specifically focused on how district court judges handled constitutional claims from individuals with diverse religious backgrounds in 2020.   

The research process required coding for the different factors raised in the case, along with specific facts. I began by noting the court, date of decision, the judge’s name, and the overall outcome of the case (whether the religious claimant won on any claims). My focus was specifically on 2020, so I made sure to note if COVID-19 and the resulting restrictions played a role in the claim. I then noted whether the person who believed their religious rights were infringed upon was in court as a plaintiff or as a defendant. Next, I identified the claimant’s religion, which often required additional research beyond the opinion to determine the specific denomination of the individual or organization. I reviewed cases from a variety of traditions, including Catholic, American Baptist, Lutheran, Unitarian, Jewish, Native American, Rastafarian, and others.    

A more detailed analysis was necessary to identify the type of religious claim involved and whether the individual prevailed or lost on it. These issues included the Free Exercise Clause, the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, the Free Speech Clause, the Equal Access Act, the Equal Protection Clause, and/or the Establishment Clause. Next, I would categorize the type of situation the specific case falls under and the claimant’s religion. I reviewed claims regarding health or safety regulations of private activities, public elementary education, religious solicitation, prisoner claims, employment discrimination against a government employer, and exemptions from anti-discrimination rules.   

As my list of cases spanned across 2020, it was important to note whether each case came before or after the SCOTUS decision in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, New York v. Cuomo on November 22, 2020. In short, the Supreme Court reviewed cases in which the government in New York limited attendance at religious services by a church and a synagogue due to COVID-19 concerns, while businesses in the area deemed essential were permitted to have unlimited numbers of people in their buildings. The Court determined that the strict restrictions imposed by the governor of New York were too severe and ordered them to be revoked as they were not generally applicable to citizens, the loss of First Amendment freedoms was likely to cause irreparable harm, and there was minimal public interest in the restrictions. This decision was vital to the lower courts in resolving the large number of cases brought by religious organizations challenging COVID-19 gathering restrictions. 

The next step in this process is for Dean Sisk to review the data and determine whether the null hypothesis has been rejected. If there is a significant conclusion, more writing about the research might follow. Previously, Dean Sisk and Professor Michael Heise have written Muslims and Religious Liberty in the Era of 9/11: Empirical Evidence from the Federal Courts, 98 Iowa L. Rev. 231 (2012), as well as Approaching Equilibrium In Free Exercise Of Religion Cases? Empirical Evidence From The Federal Courts, 64 Ariz. L. Rev. 989 (2022).  

The experience as a research assistant was an excellent opportunity to refine my analytical skills and learn more about the treatment of religious liberty by the courts.  I am eager to see the outcomes of our summer research and review future findings. 

Georgina Sugrue is a Murphy Scholar and 2L at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.

“Student Perspective” is a recurring blog series which highlights the various activities of the Murphy Scholar graduate students during their fellowship.

by Jared Zimmerman

Over the past academic year, I have had the pleasure of working as a Research Assistant with the Joint Religious Legislative Coalition (JRLC) in my role as a Murphy Scholar with the Terrance J. Murphy Institute for Catholic Thought, Law, and Business (Murphy Institute). The JRLC is an interfaith public policy advocacy group which represents the shared public policy goals of Roman Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and Muslims. One of its central aims is to repeal or modify laws that penalize individuals for marrying—laws that, intentionally or not, discourage people from entering into this lifelong commitment. The JRLC chose this because the right to marry is not only a fundamental right recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States, but also because of the positive outcomes from entering into legally recognized marriages, such as certain tax benefits and increases in happiness.

A significant hurdle to people marrying was identified by the JRLC, during the 2023-2024 Minnesota Legislative Session. Specifically, the  JRLC addressed and changed legislation that took food assistance away from people who married. Continuing this work, the JRLC asked its Murphy Scholar research assistants to identify other unjust laws that similarly targeted those who married or wished to marry.

After researching various Minnesota statutes and agency policies, I found a provision within the Minnesota GI Bill. Under current law, if the surviving spouse of a deceased military member remarries, they lose the government-assisted tuition benefits earned by their deceased spouse. In other words, choosing to remarry means forfeiting educational benefits tied to a loved one’s service and sacrifice. I proposed amending the current law, which is now incorporated into Minnesota Senate File (SF) 1959 and Minnesota House File (HF) 2444. My proposed change, which is going for a vote during the 2025-2026 MN Legislative session, allows surviving spouses to remarry without losing their access to tuition assistance.

This issue wasn’t chosen at random. It addressed a clear injustice, and it held political viability—a key factor in any advocacy effort. This topic was chosen because it: (1) addressed a discriminatory action against individuals wishing to become married and (2) it is difficult for legislators to justify being elected if they vote against the spouses of deceased service members who are simply seeking an education. But beyond political calculations, this experience reminded me that real change requires more than good policy—it requires humility, understanding, and a willingness to meet people where they are.

Policy change is often slow and incremental. Yet in this work, I found myself guided by the wisdom of Scripture—especially St. Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 9:19–22, where he calls us to “become all things to all people” and meet others where they are. For example, amending the Minnesota GI Bill meets people where they are by recognizing and responding with charity and fairness to the challenges faced by surviving spouses of deceased service members. This does not mean to stop zealously advocating for what is true and moral, but being realistic with what it is you are attempting to accomplish. What public policy you advocate for and how you do it looks different depending where you are. For example, how you advocate in Minnesota may look different compared to advocating in Alabama or California.

We want things to take place immediately, and this is a worthy desire, however, as St. Paul writes, we need to meet people where they are. This means listening to people’s concerns, attempting to dissuade and persuade them to why it is you are advocating for a righteous piece of public policy and they should too. When that fails, and it inevitably will at some point, is when we have to compromise and show radical love. Only God knows why things happen the way they do, and while it can be absolutely frustrating, any step forward is a step towards righteous change.

Never stop fighting to uphold the dignity of others—but do not forget the timeless wisdom of St. Paul: meeting people where they are. Meeting people where they are and becoming “all things to all people” has been the greatest privilege of my time with the JRLC.

Jared Zimmerman is a Murphy Scholar and 2L at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in the JD/CSMA program.

“Student Perspective” is a recurring blog series which highlights the various activities of the Murphy Scholar graduate students during their fellowship.

by Jack Frundt

In March, the Murphy Scholars hosted a clothing drive on the Law School campus. We were able to collect about 10 bags of clothing items. We delivered the donations to Closet of Hope, a ministry located at the Bloomington Covenant Church. Closet of Hope started in 2012 when a high school student and his mom would make meals for people in downtown Minneapolis. They noticed the biggest need that people faced was CLOTHING. Today, the Closet of Hope is open to anyone in the public one Saturday each month. They currently have three rooms full of clothing for women, men, and children. Four of the Murphy Scholars Fellows spent a Saturday morning in March helping the mother who founded Closet of Hope sort clothes, fold socks, and chat about the amazing people who they’ve supported with their ministry.

This is the first service that the Murphy Scholars has done as part of our “Works of Mercy” series. We hope to continue our relationship with Closet of Hope, and to continue finding more ways to spread the love of Christ.

To learn more about the Closet of Hope ministry, visit their website.

Jack Frundt is a Murphy Scholar and 1L at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in the JD/CSMA program.

“Student Perspective” is a recurring blog series which highlights the various activities of the Murphy Scholar graduate students during their fellowship.

My first encounter with the Murphy Scholar program was the dedication of an icon of St. Josephine Bakhita hosted by the Murphy Institute during my first semester of law school. The dedication began with a beautiful Mass where the priest gave a homily on how we can strive to be more like the saints. A presentation followed featuring a criminal law professor who spoke on her experience in human trafficking cases, providing valuable insight to the life of St. Bakhita, the patron saint of human trafficking victims. On an elevator ride down with Professor Gregory Sisk after the event, he asked if I would be interested in deepening my Catholic faith along with my legal education as a Murphy Scholar fellow with the Murphy Institute. I knew I could not pass up on that opportunity. Soon after, I had an interview with the Institute co-directors Professor Sisk and Dr. David Deavel, and the program manager Michelle Rash, and I found myself in the unique position of becoming a Murphy Scholar. That same semester, I attended a Mass and shared a meal with peers that shared the same values and ideals about how our Catholic faith can be a part of our work as future lawyers.  I knew it would be the start of my journey to become a Catholic lawyer.

In my nearly three years of being a Murphy Scholar, I have been privileged to attend events pertaining to wide range of topics, including embryos, abortion, freedom of religion, religious liberty, and healthcare.  I’ve had the opportunity to partake in events like the dedication of an icon of Saint Kateri Tekakwitha, the Catholic Studies 30th Anniversary Gala and engaging in lively debate and discussion with my peers at formation nights. Perhaps the most memorable of the events that I have participated in during my time as a Murphy Scholar are the “Hot Topics: Cool Talk” programs that the Institute hosts every year. The “Hot Topics: Cool Talk” series features two legal scholars engaging in a spirited, yet civil discussion about a legal topic. Many of the topics that have been featured in the past included gun ownership and qualified immunity, which have opened my perspective on these hot button issues.

During my second year, I was able to attend a dinner with the two speakers for the “Hot Topics: Cool Talk” program, “Qualified Immunity: What is It? And is It Good or Bad Policy?” featuring Professor Sisk and Professor Christopher Walker from the University of Michigan. During our conversation, we discovered that both Professor Sisk and Professor Walker shared a similar background even with their differing viewpoints – both men worked for the Civil Appellate Staff at the Department of Justice, and both were clerks for judges in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The idea of bringing different viewpoints together in the same place speaks to the delicate balance that comes from being a Catholic lawyer.

As a future lawyer, I am called to be a zealous, competent advocate for my clients with the sole focus of “being a lawyer,” which can mean either prosecuting someone for committing a crime or keeping someone out of jail. As a Catholic, I am called to walk the path of Jesus, to act in way that is compassionate and respects the dignity of all human beings, no matter what walk of life they come from. As a Catholic lawyer, my responsibility is to be a knowledgeable practitioner that can look at a defendant or client and understand that they are created in the image and likeness of God. I have a moral obligation to respect the dignity of every person in the courtroom – from the defendant to the judge, from opposing counsel to the law clerk, and anyone else who is part of the administration of the justice system. Being a Catholic lawyer means that I see the humanity in the client, opposing counsel, and the judge, which allows me to find solutions that work to bring someone into the image and likeliness of God that we are all called to be.

As I prepare to take the bar exam and look towards the future of a legal career here in Minnesota, I am eternally grateful that Professor Sisk took a chance on me and asked me to join the Murphy Scholars program. I am grateful for all the experiences and knowledge that I have received during my time as a fellow, and I look forward to being engaged as a proud alumnus of the University of St. Thomas School of Law and the Murphy Institute.

Tomy Vettukallel is a 2024 graduate of the University St. Thomas School of Law and alum of the Murphy Scholars program.

“Student Perspective” is a recurring blog series which highlights the various activities of the Murphy Scholar graduate students during their fellowship.

by Gabrielle Tremblay

A wise Jesuit priest, Fr. Larry Gillick, S.J., once told me that “a good education coaches a person to listen, reflect, and respond to invitations.” Only three months into my first year of law school, I have already encountered numerous invitations at the University of St. Thomas – lunchtime presentations inviting me to reflect on my future goals as an attorney, professors inviting my class and I to a moment of peace in prayer or reflection at the beginning of class, or peers inviting me to learn more about them in conversation. This reflection is about a more large-scale invitation that I received at St. Thomas – the invitation to pursue a Law and Catholic Studies Joint Degree (JD/MA).

Growing up in a small town in northwest Wisconsin, I did not have a Catholic education until my undergraduate career at Creighton University (Omaha, Nebraska). I majored in philosophy and history, and pursued research on Catholic theology, feminism, and domestic violence. I fell in love with the humanities and even more with research. At the same time, these opportunities invited me to reflect on the value of justice – a value that played a large part in my decision to attend law school and still motivates me as I study law.

As an undergraduate, I also felt at home in Creighton’s community. I first accepted the offer to attend law school at St. Thomas because it was clear during my visit that its kind and welcoming community resembled the community at Creighton. It was only after deciding to attend St. Thomas law that I discovered the JD/MA program. This would be the perfect opportunity to combine both my desire to become a lawyer and my passion for the humanities and research.

The Master of Arts in Catholic Studies involves both a deep dive into all humanities’ disciplines and research. It takes a holistic approach to teaching the Catholic tradition by offering classes in Catholic literature, culture, theology, philosophy, and more. Not only will these classes fill my desire to continue studying humanities, but the required master’s thesis will also satisfy my intellectual curiosity which I explored through research in my undergraduate studies.

The Catholic Studies course offerings and independent thesis invites students to think critically about values which is essential for the next generation of lawyers. During law school orientation at St. Thomas, each first-year law student is required to take a class called Moral Reasoning for Lawyers. There we discuss the trend of law students often becoming morally indifferent through a traditional legal education. Students spend three years reading cases but never meeting the real people behind them. Discussions of values are rarely introduced in class. Students feel that the law is whatever the judge decides rather than reflecting any higher moral or ethical values. To assuage these tendencies, St. Thomas law has several offerings like the Moral Reasonings for Lawyers class. Another of these offerings is the JD/MA joint degree, and I am so grateful to supplement my legal education with a master’s degree that invites critical thinking about values.

Of course, I am frequently asked, “what are you going to do with a Master’s in Catholic Studies?” This question implies I come up with “practical” use for my joint degree. For many students, the Master’s degree in Catholic Studies opens opportunities serve their communities through ministry. Although this is likely not the case for me, this is not a concern for me because I believe education does not always require a “practical” use to be worthwhile. Too often education as merely a tool for intellectual and spiritual development is deemed “impractical” as if that were a bad thing. For me, the opportunity to continue what I began at Creighton through humanities studies and research is a good in itself.

Not only do I enjoy the critical thinking about topics in the humanities, but my reflections on values of justice, fairness, and equality, were a large part of my motivation to attend law school. The times that I lose sight of this purpose are the times that my motivation to study law tends to decrease. I think it is essential for the next generation of lawyers to critically think about values because we are entering a profession that enforces laws that ought to reflect society’s values, and in turn applies those laws in ways that affect real people’s lives and aspirations. Opportunities like the JD/MA are vital for us to learn how to “listen, reflect, and respond to invitations” that this world will present us when we enter the law profession, whether that be an invitation to mentor a younger lawyer or to take a difficult pro bono case. All in all, if you’re like me, and you want to be a lawyer while pursuing intellectual and spiritual growth through the humanities and Catholic tradition, this is my invitation to you to consider the Juris Doctor – Masters in Catholic Studies at the University of St. Thomas.

Gabrielle Tremblay is a Murphy Scholar and 1L at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in the JD/CSMA program.

“Student Perspective” is a recurring blog series which highlights the various activities of the Murphy Scholar graduate students during their fellowship.

by Paul Befort

Each year, the Murphy Scholars participate in a program series focused around a theme which delves into the philosophical and theological foundations of law and policy matters.  I was fascinated by the vision of this year’s series since, as a former seminarian and a Master in Catholic Studies aspirant, I consider myself to have scratched the surface of the beauty and truth present in the Catholic faith. But this year revealed a fantastic depth to what I thought was an old topic: natural law.

The world has its own way of doing things. Unfortunately, this way of doing things is no longer closely connected with natural law. Why is this a problem? Isn’t natural law just an antiquated medieval mode of thought that is somewhat outdated in terms of solely shaping an appropriate worldview? I thought it was losing relevance until I heard three St. Thomas professors; Fr. Austin Litke, O.P., Dr. William Stevenson, and Msgr. Martin Schlag present on the subject throughout the semester.

Natural law, when referenced today, largely comes from the teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica, Prima Secunda Pars, question 91. Natural law is God’s eternal law. God is the eternal law. We are all designed to participate in the natural law by our participation in the life of God. Natural law is therefore imprinted on our hearts, integral to each of us. Natural law is our guide to what it means to live our humanity to the fullest. The more we follow natural law, the more we participate in the eternal law Who is our ultimate end. The more in accord with natural law we are, the more human we are because we are living in accord with the design that God intended.

In Romans 2:15: Saint Paul talks about the law inscribed upon our hearts. At times our feelings might be at odds with this law, but the transcription of the law into our hearts is not on an emotional level, flawed by original sin, but rather on an intellectual level. Right reason will lead us to closer union with God. Our reason knows what is better for us than our feelings. We know, intellectually, that excess and comforts do not allow us to flourish in the long term. But our physical appetites are insatiable when not governed by reason. Our participation in the natural law is how we are the happiest long term.

Since under the natural law all is a gift from God, through a natural law lens, life is about growing in personal virtue to more fully participate in the life of God who has given us everything. A Christian’s civic life flows from a sense of grateful duty, therefore.

Straying from the natural law has caused problems. I was most affected by how the modern view of education is at odds with the natural law’s view of education. In medieval times education was focused on growing in personal virtue; mentor-to-mentee relationships were typically how this came about. Teacher-and-pupil relationships could become truly human relationships of discipleship. Today, now that civic life is no longer about personal virtue and trying to make a return to the Lord, education and relationships of all kinds often become fake and contrived. Teacher-student relationships are often limited to a sixteen-week term. Networking too is not about real encounters with another person, but about what can be gained from the other. Volunteering is not about making a return to the Lord, but about padding a resume. The focus has moved away from God and the Eternal Law, becoming more about economic advantage.

Social justice is a modern concept on how we can make a better society without God. It borrows from the natural law and our Christian past to deduce that humans have dignity. But it uses a distorted reference point. Social justice focuses on rights that are inherent to human beings for who they are (rather than because of who God is), and this dictates a legal and educational system that attempts to cultivate a virtuous society from the top down. Instead of personal virtue, which then flows out to change society on the individual level, social justice contends that human beings can be perfected of things like racism, etcetera, when institutions are perfected. Of course, legislating morality rarely works. Success in modern society, when not flowing from an interior place of virtue or a response to the Goodness we have received, currently involves using others to pad one’s resume.

Natural law sets us free from social contrivances for organic relationship with the Eternal Law. Everything else flows from there. It is a law that does not constrain us but allows us to have freedom for what we are created to be: truly human through a relational participation in the Eternal Law.

Paul Befort is a Murphy Scholar and 1L at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in the JD/CSMA program.

“Student Perspective” is a recurring blog series which highlights the various activities of the Murphy Scholar graduate students during their fellowship.