The Evolution of the Supreme Court’s Approach to Free Exercise of Religion

by

The Supreme Court of the United States has played a crucial role in shaping the legal landscape of religious freedom. Over the years, its approach to the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment has evolved significantly, reflecting broader societal changes and shifting judicial philosophies.

Early Interpretations of Religious Freedom

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Court generally adopted a deferential stance towards religious practices. Cases like Reynolds v. United States (1879) upheld laws banning polygamy, emphasizing that religious practices could be limited if they conflicted with public interests.

Shifts During the Mid-20th Century

After World War II, the Court began to recognize a broader scope for religious freedom. The decision in Sherbert v. Verner (1963) marked a turning point, establishing that laws burdening religious exercise must undergo strict scrutiny. This case involved a woman denied unemployment benefits due to her Sabbath observance.

Impact of Sherbert and Religious Freedom

The Sherbert ruling set a precedent that protected individuals from laws that unjustifiably restricted their religious practices. It emphasized that the government must demonstrate a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means.

Contemporary Developments and the Modern Court

In recent decades, the Court’s approach has become more nuanced. The 1990s saw cases like Employment Division v. Smith (1990), where the Court held that generally applicable laws do not violate the Free Exercise Clause, even if they incidentally burden religious practices.

This decision marked a shift away from the strict scrutiny standard established in Sherbert, leading to ongoing debates about the balance between religious freedom and government interests.

More recently, the Court has revisited religious freedom issues, sometimes providing broader protections. Cases like Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014) allowed closely held corporations to claim religious exemptions to certain federal mandates.

Looking ahead, the Court’s approach to the Free Exercise Clause continues to evolve, reflecting ongoing societal debates about the role of religion in public life and individual rights.