-
Reynolds v. United States
George Reynolds, was charged for bigamy for marrying another woman while already having been married to one, but it was a religious practice for the practitioners of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The court decided religious practices cannot avoid established laws, such as marriage, and would not condone the practice of polygamy, and the court upheld Reynolds conviction. -
Braunfeld v. Brown
Abraham Braunfield was a retail shop owner, and as an Orthodox Jew, celebrated the Sabbath on Saturdays, and would be open on Sundays. And according to the Blue Law, only certain stores were able to operate on Sundays, and Braunfield's was not one of them. The court deemed, 6 to 3, the Blue Law completely constitutional,. as it had a secular basis and didn't make any religious practices unlawful. And for Braunfield, an economic sacrifice does not make the law unconstitutional, either. -
Torcaso v. Watkins
Torcaso was appointed to office of Notary Public by governor of Maryland, but was not given the seat due to his denial of God. This violated the First Amendment, as it made a civilian profess a religious belief they do not view, and the First Amendment specifically prohibits any state from forcing one to pursuing a religious belief not of one’s own. -
Flast v Cohen
Florance Flast joined several others in filing a lawsuit against Wilbur Cohen, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, contending that spending funds on religious schools. The law had challenged Congress’ Article 1, Section 8 (spend for general welfare), and violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment rights.
Court expressed “no view at all on the merits of appellants' claims in this case." -
Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York
Frederick Walz brought suit against New York's take commission challenging property tax exemptions for churches. In the final 1 to 7 decision, the court upheld that the exemptions did not violate the Establishment Clause, and the court said the purpose of these exemptions is to neither advance nor prohibit any religion and no one religious group has been been singled out to receive tax exemptions. -
Lemon v. Kurtzman
Statues established in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, offered public funding to non-public schools. Pennsylvania, 8 to 0, and Rhode Island, 8 to 1, had both concluded the statues was unconstitutional. Proved by the Lemon test which statues "must have a secular legislative purpose, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither promotes nor inhibits religion, and it must not foster 'excessive government entanglement with religion'." -
Wisconsin v. Yoder
Yoder and Miller were families that practice Amish beliefs, were prosecuted for not sending their children to public school, minimally, until the age of 16. Unanimously, the court upheld that the First Amendment rights the Amish faced, outweighed the educational system and attendance. Secondary school was “in sharp conflict to the Amish beliefs” and a majority decision was reached by the court. -
Larkin v. Grendel’s Den
A Massachusetts law had made it legal for churches to prohibit alcohol licensing to a business in a 500 foot perimeter between a church and school. Using the Lemon Test, the court ruled, 8 to 1, that the law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The law had a secular purpose shielding churches and schools from alcoholic purchases, but it gave the church sole power to decide on vetoing a license for a company and blended the government and church institution. -
Lynch v. Donnelly
Back story, a shopping district displayed a Christmas display including a Santa Claus, a banner reading "Seasons Greetings", and a nativity scene. Daniel Donnelly objected this display and sued the mayor of Pawtucket, Rhode Island, Dennis Lynch. The court decided, 5 to 4, the display did not violate the Establishment Clause. The city recognized, the display did not try to promote any religious activity or force a specific religion upon the peoples and was just a celebratory display. -
Wallace v. Jaffree
In a 6 to 3 decision, the court had ruled that an Alabama statue, that established a one minute period of silence for mediation and voluntary prayer, in all public schools had violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause. According to the "Lemon Test", the statue did not have a secular purpose or the intention of free meditation, but established a singular religious practice in public schools, "forcing" any students to take part in these one minute, daily prayers.
