Employment Division v. Smith
| Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith | |
|---|---|
| Argued November 6, 1989 Decided April 17, 1990 | |
| Full case name | Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of the State of Oregon, et al. v. Alfred Smith |
| Citations | 494 U.S. 872 (more) 110 S. Ct. 1595; 108 L. Ed. 2d 876; 1990 U.S. LEXIS 2021; 58 U.S.L.W. 4433; 52 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 855; 53 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) ¶ 39,826; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 21,933 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Decision against plaintiff (Emp. App. Bd., 1984); reversed and remanded, 75 Or.App. 764, 709 P.2d 246 (1985); affirmed without remand, 301 Or. 209, 721 P.2d 445 (1986); vacated with question to the state court, 485 U.S. 660 (1988); re-affirmed, 307 Ore. 68, 763 P.2d 146 (1988); cert. granted, 489 U.S. 1077 (1989). |
| Subsequent | Rehearing denied, 496 U.S. 913 (1990); Employee Appeals Board affirmed, 310 Or. 376, 799 P.2d 148 (1990) |
| Holding | |
| Neutral laws of general applicability do not violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, White, Stevens, Kennedy |
| Concurrence | O'Connor (in judgment), joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun (parts I, II, without concurring in judgment) |
| Dissent | Blackmun, joined by Brennan, Marshall |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. I | |
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), is a United States Supreme Court case that 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. Although states have the power to accommodate otherwise illegal acts performed in pursuit of religious beliefs, they are not required to do so.