Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, is a primary legal source of the first order, the actual 1990 United States Supreme Court decision holding that a generally applicable, religiously neutral law can be enforced against religious practice, in this case peyote use in Native American Church ceremony, without violating the First Amendment's free exercise clause. As the Court's own opinion, it is directly authoritative for what current constitutional doctrine holds and for the majority's stated legal reasoning. It is also one of the most contested free exercise rulings in modern constitutional history, prompting Congress to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration Act specifically in response, so it should be cited as the controlling legal holding while noting the sustained legal and religious-liberty debate it triggered rather than as an uncontroversial settlement of the underlying question.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, is the actual 1990 United States Supreme Court opinion itself, a primary legal source of the first order, treated at the top tier as the Court's own controlling holding. NotesThe Supreme Court of the United States' own opinion in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990); the court's ruling on the free exercise claim before it, not a historical or religious-studies account of the underlying dispute.
Citation
AuthorSupreme Court of the United States
Publication Year1990
URLhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/494/872/
Source Typelegal
Claims Backed By This Source (20 claims)
This source backs 20 claims across the atlas. As facts: 16 well-attested. As cited relationships: 2 holds. Plus 2 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Religious Events, 10 claims: 7 well-attested, 2 holds, 1 general references.
- Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Religions, 2 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Articles, 1 claims: 1 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.