Employment Division v Smith

Employment Division v Smith - Employment Division v Smith...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Employment Division v Smith Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:52 PM the state could fire persons for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote, even  though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual   U.S. States may enforce laws that have the incidental effect of interfering with the ability of  residents to engage in religious practices. Although states have the  power  to  accommodate otherwise illegal acts done in pursuit of religious beliefs, they are not  required  to do so.     Religious belief frequently entails the performance of physical acts -- assembling for  worship, consumption of bread and wine, abstaining from certain foods or behaviors.      But Oregon's ban on the possession of peyote is not a law specifically aimed at a physical  act engaged in for a religious reason. Rather, it is a law that applies to everyone who 
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/02/2008 for the course LS 107 taught by Professor Song during the Spring '08 term at University of California, Berkeley.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online