Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961), is the United States Supreme Court decision striking down a Maryland religious test for holding public office. Justice Hugo L. Black's opinion for the Court included a footnote naming Secular Humanism among religions that, in the United States, do not teach a belief in the existence of God, a line frequently cited on both sides of the ongoing debate over whether organized humanism's own foundational declarations, including the Humanist Manifesto series, amount to a religion. It is cited here as the primary legal source for that footnote and the debate it continues to generate.
Facts
Citation
AuthorSupreme Court of the United States (Justice Hugo L. Black, writing for the majority)
PublisherSupreme Court of the United States; reported at 367 U.S. 488
Publication Year1961
URLhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/367/488/
Source TypeCase law
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
An official published opinion of the United States Supreme Court; the primary legal record of the footnote it is cited for. Connections
Associated With
This source names Maryland directly: "Supreme Court decision striking down a Maryland religious test for holding public office."
Source Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)Supreme Court of the United States (Justice Hugo L. Black, writing for the majority)
This source names Secular Humanism directly: "Black's opinion for the Court included a footnote naming Secular Humanism among religions that, in the United States, do not teach a belief in the existence of God, a line frequently cited on both..."
Source Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)Supreme Court of the United States (Justice Hugo L. Black, writing for the majority)
Sources
Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
Supreme Court of the United States (Justice Hugo L. Black, writing for the majority), Supreme Court of the United States; reported at 367 U.S. 488, 1961View the Source Claims Backed By This Source (11 claims)
This source backs 11 claims across the atlas. As facts: 7 well-attested, 1 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 2 holds. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 9 claims: 7 well-attested, 2 holds.
- Literary Works, 2 claims: 1 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
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.