532:, the Supreme Court upheld the law despite the drug's use as part of a religious ritual, and without employing the strict scrutiny test. Instead, the Court again held that a "neutral law of general applicability" generally does not implicate the Free Exercise Clause. But the Court also stated that governmental discrimination in the field of religious belief and opinions is barred by the Free Exercise Clause, for the clause entails as core right the right to believe in and express any religious teaching in accordance with the personal desires. Any regulation by the government in the realm of religious belief and opinions is expressly forbidden by the First Amendment. Relying on its own First Amendment case law the Supreme Court concluded in
600:(1993), the Supreme Court stated that inquiries about whether laws discriminate based on religion don't end with the text of the laws at issue. Facial neutrality of laws (i.e. laws which are neutral in their language but may be discriminatory in enforcement or effect) is not determinative in these inquiries, because both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause extend beyond facial discrimination. The Supreme Court explained that "fficial action that targets religious conduct for distinctive treatment cannot be shielded by mere compliance with the requirement of facial neutrality", and "he Free Exercise Clause protects against governmental hostility which is masked as well as
387:, the freedom to hold religious beliefs and opinions is absolute. Federal or state legislation cannot therefore make it a crime to hold any religious belief or opinion due to the Free Exercise Clause. Legislation by the United States or any constituent state of the United States which forces anyone to embrace any religious belief or to say or believe anything in conflict with his religious tenets is also barred by the Free Exercise Clause.
46:
634:; the plaintiff, a Jehovah's Witness, was charged with soliciting donations without a certificate from the Public Welfare Council. The Council was to grant the certificate only if the organization requesting it was a charity or sponsored a religious cause. The Supreme Court ruled that any law granting a public body the function of determining if a cause is religious or not violates the First Amendment.
412:. The Court said: "Congress cannot pass a law for the government of the Territory which shall prohibit the free exercise of religion. The first amendment to the Constitution expressly forbids such legislation." Of federal territorial laws, the Court said: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."
490:" in various areas of civil rights law, the Court began to apply this standard to the First Amendment religion clauses as well, reading the Free Exercise Clause to require accommodation of religious conduct except where a state could show a compelling interest and no less burdensome means to achieve that end. One example was
750:(1997) the Court struck down as exceeding Congress's powers those provisions of the Act that forced state and local governments to provide protections exceeding those required by the First Amendment. Thus, state and local government actions that are facially neutral toward religion are judged by the
380:
Free exercise is the liberty of persons to reach, hold, practice and change beliefs freely according to the dictates of conscience. The Free
Exercise Clause prohibits government interference with religious belief and, within limits, religious practice. To accept any creed or the practice of any form
448:
in 1878. A case dealing with the prosecution of a polygamist under federal law, and the defendant's claim of protection under the Free
Exercise Clause, the Court sustained the law and the government's prosecution. The Court read the Free Exercise Clause as protecting religious practices, but that
438:
interpretation of the Free
Exercise Clause follows a broad arc, beginning with approximately 100 years of little attention, then taking on a relatively narrow view of the governmental restrictions required under the clause, growing into a much broader view in the 1960s, and later again receding.
661:
wrote, "the very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities ... One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other
2828:
508:
stated for the majority, "to condition the availability of benefits upon this appellant's willingness to violate a cardinal principle of her religious faith effectively penalizes the free exercise of her constitutional liberties." This test was used through the years of the
715:"that laws affecting certain religious practices do not violate the right to free exercise of religion as long as the laws are neutral, generally applicable, and not motivated by animus to religion." In 1993, the Supreme Court revisited the Free Exercise Clause in
616:. Many communities directed laws against the Witnesses and their preaching work. From 1938 to 1955, the organization was involved in over forty cases before the Supreme Court, winning a majority of them. The first important victory came in 1938, when in
2742:
729:
of
Judaism. Since the ordinance was not "generally applicable," the Court ruled that it was subject to the compelling interest test, which it failed to meet, and was therefore declared unconstitutional. In 2017, the Court applied this doctrine in
859:
3164:
459:: "However free the exercise of religion may be, it must be subordinate to the criminal laws of the country, passed with reference to actions regarded by general consent as properly the subjects of punitive legislation." The
2735:
1752:
2888:
1570:
1071:
1507:
2728:
3092:
1608:
2864:
756:
1977:
867:
1747:
680:(1963) the Court held that states must have a "compelling interest" to refuse to accommodate religiously motivated conduct. The case involved Adele Sherbert, who was denied unemployment benefits by
3044:
2694:
590:, the Supreme Court struck down the act as applied to the States, holding that it unconstitutionally attempted to usurp the Supreme Court's role in interpreting the Constitution, thus leaving the
3232:
2709:
1580:
1464:
1264:
1196:
65:
3227:
1450:
339:
2228:
1435:
1425:
93:
662:
fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote." The
Supreme Court did not rule that the Pledge was unconstitutional; rather, they held that students may not be compelled to recite it.
418:
were often the target of such restriction. Several cases involving the
Witnesses gave the Court the opportunity to rule on the application of the Free Exercise Clause. Subsequently, the
3172:
1445:
1440:
1430:
1420:
1400:
1410:
1405:
1374:
1369:
227:
1415:
1395:
1379:
2908:
1972:
1346:
922:
1104:
736:, holding that there must be a compelling state interest for express discrimination based on religious status in government funding schemes. Also in 1993, Congress passed the
504:
who was forced out of a job after her employer adopted a 6-day work week, which would have required her to work on
Saturdays against the dictates of her religion. As Justice
2223:
1351:
1315:
1081:
3247:
2791:
2627:
1320:
1300:
1290:
732:
649:
3252:
3242:
3237:
2765:
2067:
2032:
1762:
1330:
1325:
1310:
1305:
1295:
1285:
769:
580:, 426 U. S. 696, 426 U. S. 708-725 (1976)." The Court's abandonment of the strict scrutiny test was followed by intense disapproval from Congress and the passage of the
472:
361:
576:
207:
657:
had, in the
Gobitis case, suggested that the Witnesses attempt to reverse the School Board's policy by exercising their vote. In the Barnette case, however, Justice
2836:
2153:
1875:
1254:
1234:
1189:
217:
3156:
2638:
2077:
1244:
1239:
717:
596:
332:
426:(whereby a state must show a compelling interest in restricting religion-related activities), but later decisions have reduced the scope of this interpretation.
2062:
2057:
2047:
2027:
2007:
1952:
1249:
1229:
1224:
628:, in which it struck down anti-littering laws that were enforced only against Jehovah's Witnesses who were handing out pamphlets. In 1940, the Court considered
2445:
1497:
943:"Free Exercise of Religion - The issue: When may the government enforce a law that burdens an individual's ability to exercise his or her religious beliefs?"
779:
3180:
2158:
1957:
1693:
1219:
1182:
2799:
1932:
1902:
1688:
1653:
1633:
325:
187:
72:
1937:
799:
177:
2148:
35:
1040:
760:(2006), RFRA remains applicable to federal statutes, which must therefore still meet the "compelling interest" standard in free exercise cases.
2980:
2238:
1907:
1785:
639:
197:
182:
156:
3108:
2460:
1550:
1545:
1472:
161:
3204:
2193:
1987:
77:
3140:
564:, 456 U. S. 228, 456 U. S. 245 (1982), or lend its power to one or the other side in controversies over religious authority or dogma, see
2872:
2569:
2188:
1780:
408:, deciding that to do otherwise would provide constitutional protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including those as extreme as
929:
2751:
1825:
1142:
566:
247:
151:
113:
622:, the Supreme Court held that cities could not require permits for the distribution of pamphlets. In 1939, the Supreme Court decided
2855:
2168:
1530:
1205:
1165:
1114:
832:
824:
737:
581:
222:
60:
2673:
2668:
2012:
2017:
2002:
804:
108:
3196:
2424:
784:
624:
548:, 322 U. S. 78, 322 U. S. 86-88 (1944), impose special disabilities on the basis of religious views or religious status, see
288:
144:
3132:
2138:
1727:
313:
242:
3148:
2688:
2486:
1917:
1790:
1595:
1477:
1277:
1109:
703:
685:
524:
501:
1140:
First
Amendment Library entry on Free Exercise Clause (with links to all of the Supreme Court's Free Exercise opinions)
475:, this does not prevent the government from passing neutral laws that incidentally impact certain religious practices.
3100:
2702:
2606:
2564:
2559:
1962:
1648:
1613:
707:
that, as long as a law does not target a particular religious practice, it does not violate the Free
Exercise Clause.
471:" between church and state, introduced the position that although religious exercise is generally protected under the
435:
391:
212:
2656:
2103:
2072:
1922:
1795:
1560:
1555:
2956:
2404:
2284:
2083:
1815:
1638:
1515:
1361:
740:(RFRA), which sought to restore the general applicability of the "compelling interest" standard present prior to
618:
444:
396:
522:
This view of the Free Exercise Clause would begin to narrow again in the 1980s, culminating in the 1990 case of
2373:
2243:
2107:
1967:
1732:
1722:
1590:
746:
586:
544:
376:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
2996:
2972:
2163:
2111:
2037:
1865:
1742:
1737:
1673:
1643:
1585:
630:
505:
283:
237:
1048:
17:
3028:
2326:
2198:
1845:
1770:
1717:
1668:
1492:
613:
556:
415:
401:
308:
202:
139:
643:
that members of the Jehovah's Witnesses in a school could be required to salute the flag. The ruling in
3124:
2819:
2533:
1912:
1880:
1711:
1540:
1487:
942:
926:
497:
2917:
3012:
2678:
2233:
1947:
1942:
1870:
1820:
1565:
774:
357:
98:
2720:
2661:
2450:
2178:
2042:
1830:
1775:
1678:
1535:
794:
695:
654:
478:
This interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause continued into the 1960s and the ascendancy of the
423:
273:
192:
612:
During the twentieth century, many major cases involving the Free Exercise Clause were related to
3076:
3060:
3052:
3036:
2933:
2363:
2347:
2208:
2022:
1997:
1982:
1892:
1860:
1850:
1810:
1800:
789:
690:
676:
538:
515:
492:
468:
383:
298:
293:
257:
232:
123:
701:
The "compelling interest" doctrine became much narrower in 1990, when the Supreme Court held in
2683:
2429:
2414:
2394:
2268:
2143:
2122:
1886:
1698:
1525:
1161:
658:
542:, 367 U. S. 488 (1961), punish the expression of religious doctrines it believes to be false,
3188:
3084:
3020:
2988:
2896:
2880:
2305:
2052:
1927:
1855:
1840:
1575:
1520:
1482:
864:(1991) by the Council for the Advancement of Citizenship and the Center for Civic Education"
694:(1972), the Court ruled that a law that "unduly burdens the practice of religion" without a
550:
464:
1139:
3004:
2964:
2807:
2590:
2538:
2419:
2378:
2289:
2213:
2117:
2099:
1835:
1805:
1663:
1146:
487:
455:
409:
836:
496:, where the Court overturned the state Employment Security Commission's decision to deny
2783:
2528:
2507:
2491:
2455:
2399:
2368:
2183:
1018:
996:
970:
894:
681:
858:
Charles C. Haynes (Director Religious Freedom Education Project) (December 26, 2002).
721:. Hialeah had passed an ordinance banning ritual slaughter, a practice central to the
3221:
2925:
2633:
2554:
2512:
2481:
2409:
2331:
2203:
2173:
2089:
1992:
1703:
1658:
1154:
1076:
252:
118:
1174:
3116:
3068:
671:
510:
479:
419:
381:
of worship cannot be compelled by laws, because, as stated by the Supreme Court in
45:
1072:"An epic Supreme Court showdown over religion and LGBTQ rights ends in a whimper"
449:
did not protect Reynolds' practices which were crimes. The court went on to echo
2585:
2465:
722:
483:
278:
103:
1019:"Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993), at 534"
997:"Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993), at 534"
2310:
2094:
303:
2218:
712:
698:, even though it might be "neutral on its face," would be unconstitutional.
1047:. Church-State Law. Pew Research center. October 24, 2007. Archived from
394:
was first called to interpret the extent of the Free Exercise Clause in
2253:
1683:
1105:"What the Supreme Court Ruling on Foster Care Means for LGBTQ+ Parents"
726:
601:
536:: "The government may not compel affirmation of religious belief, see
404:
under federal law. The Supreme Court upheld Reynolds' conviction for
2889:
Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania
684:
because she refused to work on Saturdays, something forbidden by her
529:
405:
1041:"A Delicate Balance: The Free Exercise Clause and the Supreme Court"
725:
religion, while providing exceptions for some practices such as the
442:
The first case to closely examine of the Free Exercise Clause was
653:, the Supreme Court essentially reversed its previous opinion.
27:
Prohibits the U.S. Congress from prohibiting freedom of religion
2724:
1178:
754:
standard rather than RFRA. According to the court's ruling in
3045:
Gallagher v. Crown Kosher Super Market of Massachusetts, Inc.
2865:
Gonzales v. O Centro EspĆrita Beneficente UniĆ£o do Vegetal
965:
963:
674:
adopted an expansive view of the Free Exercise Clause. In
584:
in 1993 to attempt to restore the prior test. However, in
3173:
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission
947:
University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) School of Law
860:"History of Religious Liberty in America. Written for
3141:
Frazee v. Illinois Department of Employment Security
3233:
Separation of church and state in the United States
2948:
2907:
2854:
2847:
2818:
2773:
2647:
2619:
2599:
2578:
2547:
2521:
2500:
2474:
2438:
2387:
2356:
2340:
2319:
2298:
2277:
2261:
2252:
2131:
1761:
1626:
1506:
1463:
1388:
1360:
1339:
1276:
1263:
1212:
889:
887:
885:
2628:Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787
1153:
650:West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
3228:First Amendment to the United States Constitution
2766:First Amendment to the United States Constitution
770:First Amendment to the United States Constitution
513:, including particularly in the landmark case of
362:First Amendment to the United States Constitution
977:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. April 17, 1990
895:"Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599 (1961) at 603"
577:Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich
2837:Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru
1156:God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law
1021:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. June 11, 1993
999:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. June 11, 1993
374:
3157:Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah
2639:Bibliography of the United States Constitution
897:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. May 29, 1961
718:Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah
597:Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah
528:. Examining a state prohibition on the use of
2736:
1190:
647:, however, did not stand for long. In 1943,
333:
8:
780:Section 116 of the Constitution of Australia
3181:Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo
570:, 393 U. S. 440, 393 U. S. 445-452 (1969);
18:Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment
2851:
2743:
2729:
2721:
2258:
1273:
1269:
1197:
1183:
1175:
914:
912:
340:
326:
31:
3248:Clauses of the United States Constitution
3165:Watchtower Society v. Village of Stratton
2800:Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue
1160:. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
574:, 344 U. S. 94, 344 U. S. 95-119 (1952);
560:, 345 U. S. 67, 345 U. S. 69 (1953); cf.
422:adopted an expansive view of the clause,
3253:Christianity and law in the 18th century
3243:Freedom of religion in the United States
3238:History of religion in the United States
2695:Scene at the Signing of the Constitution
800:Freedom of religion in the United States
862:Civitas: A Framework for Civic Educatio
816:
265:
169:
131:
85:
52:
34:
2981:Minersville School District v. Gobitis
640:Minersville School District v. Gobitis
637:In 1940, the Supreme Court decided in
3109:Bob Jones University v. United States
7:
2873:Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
2662:Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom
2189:Incorporation of the Bill of Rights
400:, as related to the prosecution of
1753:Drafting and ratification timeline
1498:District of Columbia Voting Rights
567:Presbyterian Church v. Hull Church
424:the "compelling interest" doctrine
25:
3205:Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist.
1206:Constitution of the United States
833:Lincoln University (Pennsylvania)
738:Religious Freedom Restoration Act
582:Religious Freedom Restoration Act
572:Kedroff v. St. Nicholas Cathedral
2792:Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer
1609:Convention to propose amendments
1070:Millhiser, Ian (June 17, 2021).
44:
805:United States religious history
607:
486:. Applying a new standard of "
3197:Fulton v. City of Philadelphia
2848:Statutory religious exemptions
2224:Separation of church and state
975:, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), at 494"
785:Separation of Church and State
625:Schneider v. Town of Irvington
500:to a practicing member of the
1:
1728:Virginia Ratifying Convention
1103:Ring, Trudy (June 17, 2021).
314:Common good constitutionalism
3149:Employment Division v. Smith
2689:National Constitution Center
2487:Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer
1786:Assemble and Petition Clause
752:Employment Division v. Smith
742:Employment Division v. Smith
704:Employment Division v. Smith
534:Employment Division v. Smith
525:Employment Division v. Smith
502:Seventh-day Adventist Church
467:'s statement regarding the "
3133:O'Lone v. Estate of Shabazz
2560:Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
1614:State ratifying conventions
1551:Equal Opportunity to Govern
1546:Electoral College abolition
1473:Congressional Apportionment
1152:Hamilton, Marci A. (2005).
208:Right to keep and bear arms
3269:
1145:February 29, 2012, at the
218:Criminal procedural rights
2957:Reynolds v. United States
2762:
2013:Privileges and Immunities
1826:Congressional enforcement
1748:Rhode Island ratification
1639:Articles of Confederation
1604:
1581:Parental Rights amendment
1272:
919:Reynolds v. United States
733:Trinity Lutheran v. Comer
619:Lovell v. City of Griffin
608:Jehovah's Witnesses cases
463:case, which also revived
445:Reynolds v. United States
397:Reynolds v. United States
2244:Unitary executive theory
2018:Privileges or Immunities
1733:New York Circular Letter
1723:Massachusetts Compromise
973:Employment Div. v. Smith
747:City of Boerne v. Flores
670:The Supreme Court under
587:City of Boerne v. Flores
554:, 435 U. S. 618 (1978);
545:United States v. Ballard
289:Political process theory
2997:Murdock v. Pennsylvania
2973:Cantwell v. Connecticut
2164:Dormant Commerce Clause
2008:Presidential succession
1743:Fayetteville Convention
1738:Hillsborough Convention
1674:Three-fifths Compromise
1654:Philadelphia Convention
1644:Mount Vernon Conference
1531:Campaign finance reform
631:Cantwell v. Connecticut
284:Substantive due process
3093:Thomas v. Review Board
3029:Fowler v. Rhode Island
2327:William Samuel Johnson
2199:Nondelegation doctrine
1771:Admission to the Union
1718:Anti-Federalist Papers
1669:Connecticut Compromise
557:Fowler v. Rhode Island
378:
309:Strict constructionism
213:Right to trial by jury
203:Freedom of association
3125:Goldman v. Weinberger
2829:Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC
2820:Ministerial exception
2774:Exclusion of religion
2534:Richard Dobbs Spaight
2003:Presidential Electors
1978:Original Jurisdiction
1918:Full Faith and Credit
1791:Assistance of Counsel
1712:The Federalist Papers
1541:Crittenden Compromise
825:"Freedom of Religion"
686:Seventh-day Adventist
498:unemployment benefits
3101:United States v. Lee
3013:Niemotko v. Maryland
2776:from public benefits
2755:Free Exercise Clause
2703:A More Perfect Union
2679:Constitution Gardens
2600:Convention Secretary
2262:Convention President
2234:Symmetric federalism
2229:Separation of powers
1963:Necessary and Proper
1958:Natural-born citizen
1903:Freedom of the Press
1841:Copyright and Patent
1831:Contingent Elections
1649:Annapolis Convention
775:Establishment clause
482:under chief justice
370:Free Exercise Clause
366:Establishment Clause
358:Establishment Clause
354:Free Exercise Clause
258:Comprehensible rules
228:Freedom from slavery
188:Freedom of the press
132:Government structure
94:Separation of powers
38:of the United States
2710:Worldwide influence
2451:Gunning Bedford Jr.
2179:Executive privilege
2159:Criminal sentencing
2082:Title of Nobility (
2073:Taxing and Spending
1973:Oath or Affirmation
1933:House Apportionment
1796:Case or Controversy
1679:Committee of Detail
1571:"Liberty" amendment
1536:Christian amendment
1051:on January 16, 2013
795:Freedom of religion
696:compelling interest
666:Compelling interest
655:Justice Frankfurter
614:Jehovah's Witnesses
434:The history of the
416:Jehovah's Witnesses
274:Living Constitution
193:Freedom of assembly
178:Freedom of religion
3077:Wisconsin v. Yoder
3061:Sherbert v. Verner
3053:Torcaso v. Watkins
3037:Braunfeld v. Brown
2934:Ramirez v. Collier
2752:U.S. Supreme Court
2364:William Livingston
2348:Alexander Hamilton
2154:Criminal procedure
2149:Constitutional law
2084:Foreign Emoluments
2048:State of the Union
2033:Self-Incrimination
2023:Recess appointment
1816:Compulsory Process
1478:Titles of Nobility
1134:Research resources
790:Freedom of thought
691:Wisconsin v. Yoder
677:Sherbert v. Verner
594:test in place. In
539:Torcaso v. Watkins
516:Wisconsin v. Yoder
493:Sherbert v. Verner
469:wall of separation
384:Braunfeld v. Brown
294:Judicial restraint
253:Right to candidacy
140:Legislative branch
36:Constitutional law
3215:
3214:
2944:
2943:
2918:Sossamon v. Texas
2718:
2717:
2684:Constitution Week
2669:Independence Mall
2657:National Archives
2615:
2614:
2430:Gouverneur Morris
2415:Thomas Fitzsimons
2395:Benjamin Franklin
2269:George Washington
2169:Enumerated powers
2144:Concurrent powers
2139:Balance of powers
1968:No Religious Test
1908:Freedom of Speech
1699:Independence Hall
1622:
1621:
1526:Bricker amendment
1459:
1458:
659:Robert H. Jackson
562:Larson v. Valente
453:in the 1890 case
350:
349:
198:Right to petition
183:Freedom of speech
170:Individual rights
124:Tiers of scrutiny
99:Individual rights
16:(Redirected from
3260:
3189:Tandon v. Newsom
3085:McDaniel v. Paty
3021:Kunz v. New York
2989:Jamison v. Texas
2897:Tanzin v. Tanvir
2881:Zubik v. Burwell
2852:
2745:
2738:
2731:
2722:
2674:Constitution Day
2565:Charles Pinckney
2374:William Paterson
2306:Nathaniel Gorham
2259:
2038:Speech or Debate
1866:Equal Protection
1576:Ludlow amendment
1561:Flag Desecration
1556:Federal Marriage
1521:Blaine amendment
1483:Corwin Amendment
1274:
1270:
1199:
1192:
1185:
1176:
1171:
1159:
1127:
1126:
1124:
1122:
1117:on June 18, 2021
1113:. Archived from
1100:
1094:
1093:
1091:
1089:
1084:on June 18, 2021
1080:. Archived from
1067:
1061:
1060:
1058:
1056:
1045:Article/analysis
1037:
1031:
1030:
1028:
1026:
1015:
1009:
1008:
1006:
1004:
993:
987:
986:
984:
982:
967:
958:
957:
955:
953:
939:
933:
916:
907:
906:
904:
902:
891:
880:
879:
877:
875:
866:. Archived from
855:
849:
848:
846:
844:
835:. Archived from
821:
727:kosher slaughter
551:McDaniel v. Paty
465:Thomas Jefferson
356:accompanies the
342:
335:
328:
238:Equal protection
223:Right to privacy
162:Local government
157:State government
145:Executive branch
48:
32:
21:
3268:
3267:
3263:
3262:
3261:
3259:
3258:
3257:
3218:
3217:
3216:
3211:
3005:Tucker v. Texas
2965:Davis v. Beason
2940:
2903:
2843:
2814:
2808:Carson v. Makin
2775:
2769:
2758:
2749:
2719:
2714:
2649:
2643:
2611:
2607:William Jackson
2595:
2591:Abraham Baldwin
2574:
2543:
2539:Hugh Williamson
2517:
2496:
2470:
2461:Richard Bassett
2434:
2420:Jared Ingersoll
2383:
2379:Jonathan Dayton
2352:
2336:
2315:
2294:
2290:Nicholas Gilman
2273:
2248:
2214:Reserved powers
2194:Judicial review
2127:
1923:General Welfare
1846:Double Jeopardy
1757:
1684:List of Framers
1664:New Jersey Plan
1618:
1600:
1596:Victims' Rights
1516:Balanced budget
1502:
1455:
1384:
1356:
1335:
1259:
1208:
1203:
1168:
1151:
1147:Wayback Machine
1136:
1131:
1130:
1120:
1118:
1102:
1101:
1097:
1087:
1085:
1069:
1068:
1064:
1054:
1052:
1039:
1038:
1034:
1024:
1022:
1017:
1016:
1012:
1002:
1000:
995:
994:
990:
980:
978:
969:
968:
961:
951:
949:
941:
940:
936:
917:
910:
900:
898:
893:
892:
883:
873:
871:
870:on May 25, 2020
857:
856:
852:
842:
840:
839:on May 24, 2020
829:www.lincoln.edu
823:
822:
818:
813:
766:
757:Gonzales v. UDV
668:
610:
506:William Brennan
488:strict scrutiny
473:First Amendment
456:Davis v. Beason
436:Supreme Court's
432:
410:human sacrifice
372:together read:
346:
152:Judicial branch
78:Judicial review
37:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
3266:
3264:
3256:
3255:
3250:
3245:
3240:
3235:
3230:
3220:
3219:
3213:
3212:
3210:
3209:
3201:
3193:
3185:
3177:
3169:
3161:
3153:
3145:
3137:
3129:
3121:
3113:
3105:
3097:
3089:
3081:
3073:
3065:
3057:
3049:
3041:
3033:
3025:
3017:
3009:
3001:
2993:
2985:
2977:
2969:
2961:
2952:
2950:
2946:
2945:
2942:
2941:
2939:
2938:
2930:
2922:
2913:
2911:
2905:
2904:
2902:
2901:
2893:
2885:
2877:
2869:
2860:
2858:
2849:
2845:
2844:
2842:
2841:
2833:
2824:
2822:
2816:
2815:
2813:
2812:
2804:
2796:
2788:
2784:Locke v. Davey
2779:
2777:
2771:
2770:
2763:
2760:
2759:
2750:
2748:
2747:
2740:
2733:
2725:
2716:
2715:
2713:
2712:
2707:
2699:
2691:
2686:
2681:
2676:
2671:
2666:
2665:
2664:
2653:
2651:
2645:
2644:
2642:
2641:
2636:
2631:
2623:
2621:
2617:
2616:
2613:
2612:
2610:
2609:
2603:
2601:
2597:
2596:
2594:
2593:
2588:
2582:
2580:
2576:
2575:
2573:
2572:
2567:
2562:
2557:
2551:
2549:
2548:South Carolina
2545:
2544:
2542:
2541:
2536:
2531:
2529:William Blount
2525:
2523:
2522:North Carolina
2519:
2518:
2516:
2515:
2510:
2504:
2502:
2498:
2497:
2495:
2494:
2492:Daniel Carroll
2489:
2484:
2478:
2476:
2472:
2471:
2469:
2468:
2463:
2458:
2456:John Dickinson
2453:
2448:
2442:
2440:
2436:
2435:
2433:
2432:
2427:
2422:
2417:
2412:
2407:
2402:
2400:Thomas Mifflin
2397:
2391:
2389:
2385:
2384:
2382:
2381:
2376:
2371:
2369:David Brearley
2366:
2360:
2358:
2354:
2353:
2351:
2350:
2344:
2342:
2338:
2337:
2335:
2334:
2329:
2323:
2321:
2317:
2316:
2314:
2313:
2308:
2302:
2300:
2296:
2295:
2293:
2292:
2287:
2281:
2279:
2275:
2274:
2272:
2271:
2265:
2263:
2256:
2250:
2249:
2247:
2246:
2241:
2239:Taxation power
2236:
2231:
2226:
2221:
2216:
2211:
2206:
2201:
2196:
2191:
2186:
2184:Implied powers
2181:
2176:
2171:
2166:
2161:
2156:
2151:
2146:
2141:
2135:
2133:
2132:Interpretation
2129:
2128:
2126:
2125:
2120:
2115:
2097:
2092:
2087:
2080:
2075:
2070:
2065:
2060:
2055:
2050:
2045:
2040:
2035:
2030:
2028:Recommendation
2025:
2020:
2015:
2010:
2005:
2000:
1995:
1990:
1985:
1980:
1975:
1970:
1965:
1960:
1955:
1950:
1945:
1940:
1935:
1930:
1925:
1920:
1915:
1913:Fugitive Slave
1910:
1905:
1900:
1895:
1890:
1883:
1881:Excessive Bail
1878:
1873:
1868:
1863:
1858:
1853:
1848:
1843:
1838:
1833:
1828:
1823:
1818:
1813:
1808:
1803:
1798:
1793:
1788:
1783:
1781:Appropriations
1778:
1773:
1767:
1765:
1759:
1758:
1756:
1755:
1750:
1745:
1740:
1735:
1730:
1725:
1720:
1715:
1708:
1707:
1706:
1701:
1696:
1691:
1686:
1681:
1676:
1671:
1666:
1661:
1651:
1646:
1641:
1636:
1630:
1628:
1624:
1623:
1620:
1619:
1617:
1616:
1611:
1605:
1602:
1601:
1599:
1598:
1593:
1591:Single subject
1588:
1583:
1578:
1573:
1568:
1563:
1558:
1553:
1548:
1543:
1538:
1533:
1528:
1523:
1518:
1512:
1510:
1504:
1503:
1501:
1500:
1495:
1490:
1485:
1480:
1475:
1469:
1467:
1461:
1460:
1457:
1456:
1454:
1453:
1448:
1443:
1438:
1433:
1428:
1423:
1418:
1413:
1408:
1403:
1398:
1392:
1390:
1386:
1385:
1383:
1382:
1377:
1372:
1366:
1364:
1362:Reconstruction
1358:
1357:
1355:
1354:
1349:
1343:
1341:
1337:
1336:
1334:
1333:
1328:
1323:
1318:
1313:
1308:
1303:
1298:
1293:
1288:
1282:
1280:
1278:Bill of Rights
1267:
1261:
1260:
1258:
1257:
1252:
1247:
1242:
1237:
1232:
1227:
1222:
1216:
1214:
1210:
1209:
1204:
1202:
1201:
1194:
1187:
1179:
1173:
1172:
1166:
1149:
1135:
1132:
1129:
1128:
1095:
1062:
1032:
1010:
988:
959:
934:
908:
881:
850:
815:
814:
812:
809:
808:
807:
802:
797:
792:
787:
782:
777:
772:
765:
762:
744:. However, in
682:South Carolina
667:
664:
609:
606:
431:
428:
348:
347:
345:
344:
337:
330:
322:
319:
318:
317:
316:
311:
306:
301:
296:
291:
286:
281:
276:
268:
267:
263:
262:
261:
260:
255:
250:
245:
240:
235:
230:
225:
220:
215:
210:
205:
200:
195:
190:
185:
180:
172:
171:
167:
166:
165:
164:
159:
154:
148:
147:
142:
134:
133:
129:
128:
127:
126:
121:
116:
111:
106:
101:
96:
88:
87:
83:
82:
81:
80:
75:
69:
68:
63:
55:
54:
50:
49:
41:
40:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3265:
3254:
3251:
3249:
3246:
3244:
3241:
3239:
3236:
3234:
3231:
3229:
3226:
3225:
3223:
3207:
3206:
3202:
3199:
3198:
3194:
3191:
3190:
3186:
3183:
3182:
3178:
3175:
3174:
3170:
3167:
3166:
3162:
3159:
3158:
3154:
3151:
3150:
3146:
3143:
3142:
3138:
3135:
3134:
3130:
3127:
3126:
3122:
3119:
3118:
3114:
3111:
3110:
3106:
3103:
3102:
3098:
3095:
3094:
3090:
3087:
3086:
3082:
3079:
3078:
3074:
3071:
3070:
3066:
3063:
3062:
3058:
3055:
3054:
3050:
3047:
3046:
3042:
3039:
3038:
3034:
3031:
3030:
3026:
3023:
3022:
3018:
3015:
3014:
3010:
3007:
3006:
3002:
2999:
2998:
2994:
2991:
2990:
2986:
2983:
2982:
2978:
2975:
2974:
2970:
2967:
2966:
2962:
2959:
2958:
2954:
2953:
2951:
2947:
2936:
2935:
2931:
2928:
2927:
2926:Holt v. Hobbs
2923:
2920:
2919:
2915:
2914:
2912:
2910:
2906:
2899:
2898:
2894:
2891:
2890:
2886:
2883:
2882:
2878:
2875:
2874:
2870:
2867:
2866:
2862:
2861:
2859:
2857:
2853:
2850:
2846:
2839:
2838:
2834:
2831:
2830:
2826:
2825:
2823:
2821:
2817:
2810:
2809:
2805:
2802:
2801:
2797:
2794:
2793:
2789:
2786:
2785:
2781:
2780:
2778:
2772:
2768:
2767:
2761:
2756:
2753:
2746:
2741:
2739:
2734:
2732:
2727:
2726:
2723:
2711:
2708:
2705:
2704:
2700:
2697:
2696:
2692:
2690:
2687:
2685:
2682:
2680:
2677:
2675:
2672:
2670:
2667:
2663:
2660:
2659:
2658:
2655:
2654:
2652:
2646:
2640:
2637:
2635:
2634:Jacob Shallus
2632:
2630:
2629:
2625:
2624:
2622:
2618:
2608:
2605:
2604:
2602:
2598:
2592:
2589:
2587:
2584:
2583:
2581:
2577:
2571:
2570:Pierce Butler
2568:
2566:
2563:
2561:
2558:
2556:
2555:John Rutledge
2553:
2552:
2550:
2546:
2540:
2537:
2535:
2532:
2530:
2527:
2526:
2524:
2520:
2514:
2513:James Madison
2511:
2509:
2506:
2505:
2503:
2499:
2493:
2490:
2488:
2485:
2483:
2482:James McHenry
2480:
2479:
2477:
2473:
2467:
2464:
2462:
2459:
2457:
2454:
2452:
2449:
2447:
2444:
2443:
2441:
2437:
2431:
2428:
2426:
2423:
2421:
2418:
2416:
2413:
2411:
2410:George Clymer
2408:
2406:
2405:Robert Morris
2403:
2401:
2398:
2396:
2393:
2392:
2390:
2386:
2380:
2377:
2375:
2372:
2370:
2367:
2365:
2362:
2361:
2359:
2355:
2349:
2346:
2345:
2343:
2339:
2333:
2332:Roger Sherman
2330:
2328:
2325:
2324:
2322:
2318:
2312:
2309:
2307:
2304:
2303:
2301:
2299:Massachusetts
2297:
2291:
2288:
2286:
2283:
2282:
2280:
2278:New Hampshire
2276:
2270:
2267:
2266:
2264:
2260:
2257:
2255:
2251:
2245:
2242:
2240:
2237:
2235:
2232:
2230:
2227:
2225:
2222:
2220:
2217:
2215:
2212:
2210:
2207:
2205:
2204:Plenary power
2202:
2200:
2197:
2195:
2192:
2190:
2187:
2185:
2182:
2180:
2177:
2175:
2174:Equal footing
2172:
2170:
2167:
2165:
2162:
2160:
2157:
2155:
2152:
2150:
2147:
2145:
2142:
2140:
2137:
2136:
2134:
2130:
2124:
2121:
2119:
2116:
2113:
2109:
2105:
2101:
2098:
2096:
2095:Trial by Jury
2093:
2091:
2088:
2085:
2081:
2079:
2076:
2074:
2071:
2069:
2066:
2064:
2061:
2059:
2056:
2054:
2051:
2049:
2046:
2044:
2041:
2039:
2036:
2034:
2031:
2029:
2026:
2024:
2021:
2019:
2016:
2014:
2011:
2009:
2006:
2004:
2001:
1999:
1996:
1994:
1991:
1989:
1986:
1984:
1981:
1979:
1976:
1974:
1971:
1969:
1966:
1964:
1961:
1959:
1956:
1954:
1951:
1949:
1948:Ineligibility
1946:
1944:
1943:Import-Export
1941:
1939:
1936:
1934:
1931:
1929:
1926:
1924:
1921:
1919:
1916:
1914:
1911:
1909:
1906:
1904:
1901:
1899:
1898:Free Exercise
1896:
1894:
1891:
1889:
1888:
1887:Ex Post Facto
1884:
1882:
1879:
1877:
1874:
1872:
1871:Establishment
1869:
1867:
1864:
1862:
1859:
1857:
1854:
1852:
1849:
1847:
1844:
1842:
1839:
1837:
1834:
1832:
1829:
1827:
1824:
1822:
1821:Confrontation
1819:
1817:
1814:
1812:
1809:
1807:
1804:
1802:
1799:
1797:
1794:
1792:
1789:
1787:
1784:
1782:
1779:
1777:
1774:
1772:
1769:
1768:
1766:
1764:
1760:
1754:
1751:
1749:
1746:
1744:
1741:
1739:
1736:
1734:
1731:
1729:
1726:
1724:
1721:
1719:
1716:
1714:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1704:Syng inkstand
1702:
1700:
1697:
1695:
1692:
1690:
1687:
1685:
1682:
1680:
1677:
1675:
1672:
1670:
1667:
1665:
1662:
1660:
1659:Virginia Plan
1657:
1656:
1655:
1652:
1650:
1647:
1645:
1642:
1640:
1637:
1635:
1632:
1631:
1629:
1625:
1615:
1612:
1610:
1607:
1606:
1603:
1597:
1594:
1592:
1589:
1587:
1586:School Prayer
1584:
1582:
1579:
1577:
1574:
1572:
1569:
1567:
1564:
1562:
1559:
1557:
1554:
1552:
1549:
1547:
1544:
1542:
1539:
1537:
1534:
1532:
1529:
1527:
1524:
1522:
1519:
1517:
1514:
1513:
1511:
1509:
1505:
1499:
1496:
1494:
1491:
1489:
1486:
1484:
1481:
1479:
1476:
1474:
1471:
1470:
1468:
1466:
1462:
1452:
1449:
1447:
1444:
1442:
1439:
1437:
1434:
1432:
1429:
1427:
1424:
1422:
1419:
1417:
1414:
1412:
1409:
1407:
1404:
1402:
1399:
1397:
1394:
1393:
1391:
1387:
1381:
1378:
1376:
1373:
1371:
1368:
1367:
1365:
1363:
1359:
1353:
1350:
1348:
1345:
1344:
1342:
1338:
1332:
1329:
1327:
1324:
1322:
1319:
1317:
1314:
1312:
1309:
1307:
1304:
1302:
1299:
1297:
1294:
1292:
1289:
1287:
1284:
1283:
1281:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1268:
1266:
1262:
1256:
1253:
1251:
1248:
1246:
1243:
1241:
1238:
1236:
1233:
1231:
1228:
1226:
1223:
1221:
1218:
1217:
1215:
1211:
1207:
1200:
1195:
1193:
1188:
1186:
1181:
1180:
1177:
1169:
1167:0-521-85304-4
1163:
1158:
1157:
1150:
1148:
1144:
1141:
1138:
1137:
1133:
1116:
1112:
1111:
1106:
1099:
1096:
1083:
1079:
1078:
1073:
1066:
1063:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1036:
1033:
1020:
1014:
1011:
998:
992:
989:
976:
974:
966:
964:
960:
948:
944:
938:
935:
931:
928:
924:
920:
915:
913:
909:
896:
890:
888:
886:
882:
869:
865:
863:
854:
851:
838:
834:
830:
826:
820:
817:
810:
806:
803:
801:
798:
796:
793:
791:
788:
786:
783:
781:
778:
776:
773:
771:
768:
767:
763:
761:
759:
758:
753:
749:
748:
743:
739:
735:
734:
728:
724:
720:
719:
714:
710:
706:
705:
699:
697:
693:
692:
687:
683:
679:
678:
673:
665:
663:
660:
656:
652:
651:
646:
642:
641:
635:
633:
632:
627:
626:
621:
620:
615:
605:
603:
599:
598:
593:
589:
588:
583:
579:
578:
573:
569:
568:
563:
559:
558:
553:
552:
547:
546:
541:
540:
535:
531:
527:
526:
520:
518:
517:
512:
507:
503:
499:
495:
494:
489:
485:
481:
476:
474:
470:
466:
462:
458:
457:
452:
447:
446:
440:
437:
429:
427:
425:
421:
417:
413:
411:
407:
403:
399:
398:
393:
392:Supreme Court
390:In 1878, the
388:
386:
385:
377:
373:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
343:
338:
336:
331:
329:
324:
323:
321:
320:
315:
312:
310:
307:
305:
302:
300:
297:
295:
292:
290:
287:
285:
282:
280:
277:
275:
272:
271:
270:
269:
264:
259:
256:
254:
251:
249:
248:Voting rights
246:
244:
241:
239:
236:
234:
231:
229:
226:
224:
221:
219:
216:
214:
211:
209:
206:
204:
201:
199:
196:
194:
191:
189:
186:
184:
181:
179:
176:
175:
174:
173:
168:
163:
160:
158:
155:
153:
150:
149:
146:
143:
141:
138:
137:
136:
135:
130:
125:
122:
120:
119:Equal footing
117:
115:
114:Republicanism
112:
110:
107:
105:
102:
100:
97:
95:
92:
91:
90:
89:
84:
79:
76:
74:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
59:
58:
57:
56:
51:
47:
43:
42:
39:
33:
30:
19:
3203:
3195:
3187:
3179:
3171:
3163:
3155:
3147:
3139:
3131:
3123:
3117:Bowen v. Roy
3115:
3107:
3099:
3091:
3083:
3075:
3069:Cruz v. Beto
3067:
3059:
3051:
3043:
3035:
3027:
3019:
3011:
3003:
2995:
2987:
2979:
2971:
2963:
2955:
2932:
2924:
2916:
2895:
2887:
2879:
2871:
2863:
2835:
2827:
2806:
2798:
2790:
2782:
2764:
2754:
2701:
2693:
2626:
2425:James Wilson
2388:Pennsylvania
2285:John Langdon
2043:Speedy Trial
1897:
1885:
1776:Appointments
1710:
1493:Equal Rights
1389:20th century
1155:
1119:. Retrieved
1115:the original
1110:The Advocate
1108:
1098:
1086:. Retrieved
1082:the original
1075:
1065:
1053:. Retrieved
1049:the original
1044:
1035:
1023:. Retrieved
1013:
1001:. Retrieved
991:
979:. Retrieved
972:
952:November 22,
950:. Retrieved
946:
937:
918:
899:. Retrieved
872:. Retrieved
868:the original
861:
853:
841:. Retrieved
837:the original
828:
819:
755:
751:
745:
741:
731:
716:
708:
702:
700:
689:
675:
669:
648:
644:
638:
636:
629:
623:
617:
611:
595:
591:
585:
575:
571:
565:
561:
555:
549:
543:
537:
533:
523:
521:
514:
511:Burger Court
491:
480:Warren Court
477:
460:
454:
450:
443:
441:
433:
420:Warren Court
414:
395:
389:
382:
379:
375:
369:
365:
353:
351:
29:
2586:William Few
2466:Jacob Broom
2446:George Read
2320:Connecticut
2254:Signatories
2104:Legislative
2078:Territorial
1998:Presentment
1983:Origination
1938:Impeachment
1893:Extradition
1861:Engagements
1851:Due Process
1801:Citizenship
1488:Child Labor
1025:October 25,
1003:October 25,
932: (1878)
672:Earl Warren
484:Earl Warren
299:Purposivism
279:Originalism
243:Citizenship
233:Due process
104:Rule of law
3222:Categories
2698:(painting)
2650:and legacy
2508:John Blair
2357:New Jersey
2311:Rufus King
2209:Preemption
2123:War Powers
2058:Suspension
1876:Exceptions
1566:Human Life
1465:Unratified
1265:Amendments
901:August 12,
811:References
688:faith. In
304:Textualism
109:Federalism
86:Principles
66:Amendments
2219:Saxbe fix
2108:Executive
2063:Take Care
2053:Supremacy
1928:Guarantee
1856:Elections
1627:Formation
1340:1795ā1804
713:precedent
451:Reynolds
2757:case law
2501:Virginia
2475:Maryland
2439:Delaware
2341:New York
2118:Vicinage
2112:Judicial
1836:Contract
1806:Commerce
1694:Printing
1508:Proposed
1220:Preamble
1213:Articles
1143:Archived
1121:June 17,
1088:June 17,
981:July 23,
930:145, 162
764:See also
723:SanterĆa
711:set the
519:(1972).
461:Reynolds
430:Overview
402:polygamy
368:and the
61:Articles
53:Overview
2648:Display
2620:Related
2579:Georgia
2100:Vesting
2068:Takings
1953:Militia
1811:Compact
1763:Clauses
1689:Signing
1634:History
874:May 25,
843:May 28,
645:Gobitis
360:of the
73:History
3208:(2022)
3200:(2021)
3192:(2021)
3184:(2020)
3176:(2018)
3168:(2002)
3160:(1993)
3152:(1990)
3144:(1989)
3136:(1987)
3128:(1986)
3120:(1986)
3112:(1983)
3104:(1982)
3096:(1981)
3088:(1978)
3080:(1972)
3072:(1972)
3064:(1963)
3056:(1961)
3048:(1961)
3040:(1961)
3032:(1953)
3024:(1951)
3016:(1951)
3008:(1946)
3000:(1943)
2992:(1943)
2984:(1940)
2976:(1940)
2968:(1890)
2960:(1879)
2949:Others
2937:(2022)
2929:(2015)
2921:(2011)
2909:RLUIPA
2900:(2020)
2892:(2020)
2884:(2016)
2876:(2014)
2868:(2006)
2840:(2020)
2832:(2012)
2811:(2022)
2803:(2020)
2795:(2017)
2787:(2004)
2706:(film)
2090:Treaty
1993:Postal
1988:Pardon
1164:
1055:May 4,
530:peyote
406:bigamy
364:. The
266:Theory
925:
709:Smith
602:overt
592:Smith
2856:RFRA
1162:ISBN
1123:2021
1090:2021
1057:2012
1027:2020
1005:2020
983:2020
954:2013
927:U.S.
903:2020
876:2020
845:2020
352:The
1255:VII
1235:III
1077:Vox
604:."
3224::
2110:/
2106:/
1451:27
1446:26
1441:25
1436:24
1431:23
1426:22
1421:21
1416:20
1411:19
1406:18
1401:17
1396:16
1380:15
1375:14
1370:13
1352:12
1347:11
1331:10
1250:VI
1240:IV
1230:II
1107:.
1074:.
1043:.
962:^
945:.
923:98
921:,
911:^
884:^
831:.
827:.
2744:e
2737:t
2730:v
2114:)
2102:(
2086:)
1326:9
1321:8
1316:7
1311:6
1306:5
1301:4
1296:3
1291:2
1286:1
1245:V
1225:I
1198:e
1191:t
1184:v
1170:.
1125:.
1092:.
1059:.
1029:.
1007:.
985:.
971:"
956:.
905:.
878:.
847:.
341:e
334:t
327:v
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
