Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith was decided by the US Supreme Court in 1990 after two counselors were fired, and then denied unemployment benefits, for ingesting peyote at a Native American Church sacrament. The Court held that a neutral, generally applicable law is not subject to a religious exemption under the Free Exercise Clause, denying the claim. The ruling drew wide criticism across religious traditions and led Congress to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993 to restore a stronger standard, making it one of the most consequential religious liberty rulings of the twentieth century.
Facts
The Event
When It Happened Where It HappenedWashington, D.C., the Supreme Court of the United States; the underlying dismissal and denial of unemployment benefits arose in Oregon. 1 Principal PartiesAlfred Smith and Galen Black, members of the Native American Church dismissed from a private drug rehabilitation counseling job for ingesting peyote sacramentally; Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion. 1 Scholarship
Where It Is RecordedReported at 494 U.S. 872 (1990) in the United States Reports. 1 How Its Legacy Is ContestedCriticized broadly across the political and religious spectrum for narrowing free exercise protection, the decision prompted Congress to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993; the Supreme Court then held in City of Boerne v. Flores (1997) that RFRA could not bind the states, leaving Smith's rule in force there while RFRA continues to apply against the federal government. 3 Consequences
What It SettledThe Court denied the free exercise claim, holding that a neutral, generally applicable law needs no religious exemption; the criticism it drew led Congress to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993. 1 Status
Legal StatusEstablished that a neutral, generally applicable law needs no religious exemption under the Free Exercise Clause, commonly called the Smith test; the decision did not hold that no free exercise claim can ever succeed, only that this one required no special scrutiny. 1 Connections
Associated With
Source Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872Supreme Court of the United States
Belongs to Tradition
Source Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872Supreme Court of the United States
Related To
Sources
1. Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872
2. Employment Division v. Smith (Wikipedia)
Lead
494 U.S. 872 (1990)
Lead section: period-start-year
Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, where the Court held that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual.
View the Source3. City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507
Encyclopaedia Britannica (online academic reference)
Encyclopaedia Britannica editors, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 2024s.v. Employment Division v. SmithView the Source Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.