Peter Montgomery

Peter Montgomery is a senior fellow at People For the American Way Foundation, where he leads the organization’s research and writing on the Religious Right. Follow him on Twitter: @petemont

Recent Articles

Hobby Lobby Decision Could Give License to Anti-Labor 'Biblical Economics' Practices

Religious Right leaders have been working hard to convince conservative evangelicals that the Tea Party’s anti-government, anti-union, anti-welfare agenda is grounded in the Bible, setting the stage for more "religious liberty" legal arguments by corporation owners.

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais
This article originally appeared on Right Wing Watch , the website published by People For the American Way. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in her dissent in the Hobby Lobby case that the Court’s conservative majority had “ventured into a minefield” with its decision. Many of those mines have already been placed by right-wing leaders who claim a religious grounding not only for anti-gay, anti-abortion, and anti-contraception positions, but also for opposition to collective bargaining, minimum wage laws, progressive taxation and government involvement in the alleviation of poverty. In Hobby Lobby , the Court found for the first time that for-profit corporations have religious rights just like real people and can therefore make claims under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that they should be exempt from laws that burden their corporate “exercise” of religion. In her dissent , Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was deeply skeptical of Justice...

Justice Samuel Alito's Deep Roots in the American Right

He's the most pro-corporate jurist on the Supreme Court. So decisions that grant companies religious rights or take aim at labor unions come quite naturally to him.

AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta
AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito Jr., delivers his remarks during a Federalist Society dinner gathering, Thursday, Nov. 16, 2006, in Washington. This article originally appeared at The Huffington Post . Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito ended this Supreme Court session with a bang, writing the majority opinion in two cases that gave for-profit corporations the right to make religious liberty claims to evade government regulation, and set the stage for the fulfillment of a central goal of the right-wing political movement: the destruction of public employee unions. Neither of the decisions was particularly surprising. Samuel Alito is the single most pro-corporate Justice on the most pro-business Court since the New Deal. Still, Alito's one-two punch was another extraordinary milestone for the strategists who have been working for the past 40 years to put business firmly in the driver's seat of American politics. Many would suggest that...

Meet the Billionaire Brothers You Never Heard of Who Fund the Religious Right

The Wilks brothers, whose fortune comes from fracking, give tens of millions to right-wing groups and anti-choice "pregnancy centers," anti-LGBT groups, and organizations affiliated with ALEC.

Cisco Chamber of Commerce
This article was produced by and originally published by Right Wing Watch , the blog of People for the American Way. Last June, presidential hopefuls Rand Paul and Ted Cruz traveled to Iowa for an event convened by David Lane, a political operative who uses pastors to mobilize conservative Christian voters. Lane is a Christian-nation extremist who believes the Bible should be a primary textbook in America’s public schools, and that any politician who disagrees should be voted out. Lane’s events are usually closed to the media, but he has given special access to the Christian Broadcasting Network’s sympathetic David Brody. Brody’s coverage of the Iowa event included short video clips of comments by brothers Farris and Dan Wilks, who were identified only as members of Lane’s Pastors and Pews group. CBN’s Brody reported: “The Wilks brothers worry that America’s declining morals will especially hurt the younger generation, so they’re...

Why It's a Bad Idea to #StandWithRand, Even on Drones

Progressive activists, including those with legitimate concerns about civil liberties and the use of drones, should think twice about leaving the appeals court seat vacant in order to oppose David Barron.

©Jenny Warburg
Last year, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky opposed the nomination of CIA director John Brennan with a 13-hour speech against the Obama administration’s drone policies. The filibuster, a carefully calculated opening move for Paul’s 2016 presidential campaign, garnered massive media attention. So it should not be a surprise that he planned another filibuster, this time against today’s scheduled Senate consideration of appeals court nominee David Barron. As an attorney in the White House Office of Legal Counsel, Barron worked on memoranda providing a legal justification for the killing-by-drone of American Al-Qaeda strategist Anwar Al-Awlaki in Yemen. Paul’s latest grab for media attention has been rolled out with political precision: an op-ed in last week’s New York Times , followed by strategic media leaks of his planned filibuster remarks. In the Times , Paul implied that his opposition was a form of information-seeking leverage, saying he would fight Barron...

Pages