Employment Division v. Smith

E14513

United States Supreme Court case free exercise of religion case landmark decision

Employment Division v. Smith is a landmark 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed protections for religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause by upholding the enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws even when they incidentally burden religion.

Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

Observed surface forms (2)

Surface form	Occurrences
Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)	1
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)	1

Statements (49)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ free exercise of religion case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ
hasAreaOfLaw	First Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ surface form: First Amendment law constitutional law ⓘ religious liberty law ⓘ
hasCategory	1990 in United States case law ⓘ United States Supreme Court cases on freedom of religion ⓘ United States Supreme Court cases on the First Amendment ⓘ
hasChiefJusticeAtDecision	William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
hasCitation	494 U.S. 872 ⓘ
hasConcurrenceBy	Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ surface form: Harry Blackmun Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
hasConstitutionalProvision	First Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ Free Exercise Clause ⓘ
hasCountry	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
hasCourt	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
hasDecisionDate	1990 ⓘ
hasDecisionYear	1990 ⓘ
hasDissentBy	Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ surface form: Harry Blackmun Thurgood Marshall ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ
hasFact	Oregon law criminalized possession of peyote ⓘ respondents ingested peyote as part of a religious ceremony ⓘ respondents were members of the Native American Church ⓘ
hasFullCitation	Employment Division v. Smith self-linksurface differs ⓘ surface form: Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)
hasHolding	The Free Exercise Clause does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law proscribes conduct that his religion prescribes. ⓘ
hasImpact	narrowed judicial protection for religiously motivated conduct under the Free Exercise Clause ⓘ prompted legislative responses to restore stronger protections for religious exercise ⓘ shifted Free Exercise analysis away from strict scrutiny for neutral, generally applicable laws ⓘ
hasIssue	whether Oregon could deny unemployment benefits to workers fired for using peyote in a religious ceremony ⓘ
hasJurisdiction	Oregon ⓘ
hasKeyConcept	compelling interest test ⓘ incidental burden on religion ⓘ neutral law of general applicability ⓘ strict scrutiny ⓘ unemployment benefits and religious conduct ⓘ
hasLegalPrinciple	neutral laws of general applicability that incidentally burden religion do not violate the Free Exercise Clause ⓘ strict scrutiny is not required for every neutral, generally applicable law that burdens religious practice ⓘ
hasLowerCourt	Oregon Supreme Court ⓘ
hasMajorityAuthor	Antonin Scalia ⓘ
hasOutcome	Oregon Employment Department ⓘ surface form: Oregon was allowed to deny unemployment benefits to the respondents
hasPetitioner	Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon ⓘ
hasProceduralHistory	affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment of the Oregon Supreme Court ⓘ
hasRespondent	Alfred Leo Smith ⓘ Galen Black ⓘ
hasSubsequentLegislationInfluenced	Religious Freedom Restoration Act ⓘ surface form: Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 state-level Religious Freedom Restoration Acts ⓘ
hasVote	6–3 ⓘ

Referenced by (13)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Frazee v. Illinois Department of Employment Security → comparedWithCase → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia → didNotOverrule → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Employment Division v. Smith → hasFullCitation → Employment Division v. Smith self-linksurface differs ⓘ

this entity surface form: Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Free Exercise Clause → interpretedInCase → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia → interpretsPrecedent → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Sherbert v. Verner → laterLimitedBy → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Public Law 103-141 → legislativeResponseTo → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Sherbert test → limitedByCase → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Religious Freedom Restoration Act → motivatedBy → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Alfred Leo Smith → partyTo → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah → precedentInterpreted → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

Public Law 103-141 → relatedCase → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ

this entity surface form: Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division → relatedCase → Employment Division v. Smith ⓘ