Home›Sources›Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150SourcesWatchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150Citation FormatsGeneral ReferenceGeneral Reference Citation TextDivinity Atlas. "Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150." Accessed August 30, 2026. https://dev-divinity.interactiveatlas.org/sources/watchtower-bible-and-tract-society-of-new-york-v-village-of-stratton-536-u-s-150.Copy General ReferenceAPA StyleAPA Style Citation TextDivinity Atlas. (n.d.). Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150. Retrieved August 30, 2026, from https://dev-divinity.interactiveatlas.org/sources/watchtower-bible-and-tract-society-of-new-york-v-village-of-stratton-536-u-s-150Copy APA StyleBibTeXBibTeX Citation Text@misc{divinityatlas-watchtower-bible-and-tract-society-of-ne, author = {Divinity Atlas}, title = {Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150}, year = {2026}, url = {https://dev-divinity.interactiveatlas.org/sources/watchtower-bible-and-tract-society-of-new-york-v-village-of-stratton-536-u-s-150}, note = {Accessed August 30, 2026} }Copy BibTeXWatchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, the Supreme Court of the United States' own 2002 opinion (536 U.S. 150), struck down an Ohio village ordinance requiring a permit before door to door canvassing, including Jehovah's Witnesses' ministry work. Its strength is that it is the Court's own opinion, the primary record of what it actually held. Its limit is that it rules on the ordinance before it rather than offering an independent account of Jehovah's Witness door to door practice itself, which needs a separate source.FactsCross-Tradition ConnectionsClaims Backed By This Source (13 claims)Comments (0)Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)FactsAssessmentReliability TierWell-attested1The Supreme Court of the United States' own written opinion, the primary legal record of what the Court actually held, rather than a summary or commentary on it.NotesWell-attestedThe Supreme Court of the United States' own opinion in Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150 (2002); the court's ruling on the door-to-door canvassing ordinance before it, not an independent account of Jehovah's Witness practice.CitationAuthorWell-attestedSupreme Court of the United StatesPublication YearWell-attested2002URLWell-attestedhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/536/150/Source TypeWell-attestedlegalCross-Tradition ConnectionsAssociated WithJehovah's Witnesses, Denominations Well-attested This source names Jehovah's Witnesses directly: "door to door canvassing, including Jehovah's Witnesses' ministry work."Source Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150Supreme Court of the United Statestier 1New York, Cities Well-attested This source names New York directly: "Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v."Source Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150Supreme Court of the United Statestier 1Claims Backed By This Source (13 claims)This source backs 13 claims across the atlas. As facts: 8 well-attested. As cited relationships: 2 holds. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.Disposition By TopicSources, 9 claims: 7 well-attested, 2 holds.Practices, 3 claims: 1 well-attested, 2 general references.Denominations, 1 claims: 1 general references.Well-attested8PracticesDoor-to-door evangelismSourcesWatchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150Holds2SourcesWatchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150General References3DenominationsJehovah's WitnessesPracticesDoor-to-door evangelismComments (0)No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.Sign in to join the discussion.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 YearThe atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.Show This Year