Reynolds v. United States

E5191

Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.


Statements (46)
Predicate Object
instanceOf First Amendment case
U.S. Supreme Court case
free exercise of religion case
legal case
areaOfLaw constitutional law
criminal law
religion clauses of the First Amendment
category 1879 in United States case law
U.S. Supreme Court cases on freedom of religion
United States polygamy case law
chiefJusticeAtDecision Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite
surface form: "Morrison R. Waite"
citation 98 U.S. 145
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Free Exercise Clause
country United States of America
surface form: "United States"
court Supreme Court of the United States
decisionDate 1879-01-06
decisionType unanimous decision
factPattern Reynolds v. United States
surface form: "George Reynolds was prosecuted for bigamy under federal law in the Utah Territory"
fullCaseName Reynolds v. United States
surface form: "George Reynolds v. United States"
holding Laws banning polygamy do not violate the Free Exercise Clause
Religious duty is not a defense to a criminal indictment
The Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws
The Free Exercise Clause protects religious belief but not all religiously motivated conduct
impact established the belief–action distinction in Free Exercise analysis
upheld federal power to criminalize polygamy in U.S. territories
jurisdiction United States government
surface form: "United States federal government"
legalIssue constitutionality of criminal bans on polygamy
scope of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment
opinionAuthor Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite
originatingJurisdiction Utah
surface form: "Territory of Utah"
page 145
partyAffiliationOfDefendant member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
petitioner George Reynolds
precedentFor distinction between religious belief and religiously motivated conduct
later Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence
reasoning Allowing religious belief to excuse criminal acts would make religious doctrine superior to the law of the land
Government may regulate actions that are in violation of social duties or subversive of good order
respondent United States of America
surface form: "United States"
result conviction of George Reynolds for bigamy affirmed
statuteInvolved Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act
subjectMatter bigamy
polygamy
religious liberty
volume 98 U.S.
yearDecided 1879

Referenced by (8)

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

George Reynolds defendantIn Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States factPattern Reynolds v. United States
this entity surface form: "George Reynolds was prosecuted for bigamy under federal law in the Utah Territory"
Reynolds v. United States fullCaseName Reynolds v. United States
this entity surface form: "George Reynolds v. United States"
Free Exercise Clause interpretedInCase Reynolds v. United States
Cantwell v. Connecticut relatedCase Reynolds v. United States
George Reynolds relatedCase Reynolds v. United States
Everson v. Board of Education relatedTo Reynolds v. United States
Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act relatedToCase Reynolds v. United States

Please wait…