Irreparability resurrected?: Does a recalibrated irreparable injury rule threaten the Warren Court's establishment clause legacy?

The significance of the injunction as a crucial remedy to implement and preserve the Warren Court's constitutional legacy is examined. The classic prerequisite for an injunction and the irreparable injury rule are addressed and an altered prerequisite is examined. The proposed test would limit the availability of an injunction to cases in which the judge could enforce it with coercive contempt. The proposed test is examined in the crucible of contemporary litigation involving unconstitutional establishments of religion with official prayers and other religious observances. After scrutinizing damages and other remedies, it is argued that the proposed test would impede a federal judge's ability to protect effectively a citizen's rights under the First Amendment's Religion Clause. It is concluded that it is an indispensable remedy across the constitutional spectrum. If anything, a federal court's ability to grant an injunction should be augmented to assure implementation of the Warren Court's rulings as well as citizens' other rights.