Quiz #86 -- Why did the Fulton decision not overrule Employment Division v. Smith?

Religion Law Quiz #86

 

In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Catholic Social Services urged the Supreme Court to overrule Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 110 S.Ct. 1595, 108 L.Ed.2d 876 (1990).  As you may recall, “Smith held that laws incidentally burdening religion are ordinarily not subject to strict scrutiny under the Free Exercise Clause so long as they are neutral and generally applicable.”  Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 210 L. Ed. 2d 137, 141 S. Ct. 1868, 1876 (2021). But despite the urging the Supreme Court did not overrule Smith.  Why not? 

 

(Scroll down for the answer)

 

Answer: Because the City of Philadelphia had burdened the exercise of religion through its policies that were not neutral and generally applicable.  Here’s what the Supreme Court specifically said:

 

Smith held that laws incidentally burdening religion are ordinarily not subject to strict scrutiny under the Free Exercise Clause so long as they are neutral and generally applicable. 494 U.S. at 878–882, 110 S.Ct. 1595. CSS urges us to overrule Smith, and the concurrences in the judgment argue in favor of doing so, see post, pp. 1883 – 1884 (opinion of ALITO, J.); post, p. 1926 (opinion of GORSUCH, J.). But we need not revisit that decision here. This case falls outside Smith because the City has burdened the religious exercise of CSS through policies that do not meet the requirement of being neutral and generally applicable. See Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 531–532, 113 S.Ct. 2217, 124 L.Ed.2d 472 (1993).

 

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 210 L. Ed. 2d 137, 141 S. Ct. 1868, 1876–77 (2021)

 

Disclaimer: The Religion Law Quizzes are provided as a service to you. They are intended only for educational purposes. Nothing in the Quizzes is intended to be legal advice and they should not be relied upon as conclusive on any issue discussed therein.

 

HERE IS AN AI GENERATED SUMMARY OF TODAY’S PODCAST

 

Welcome to another insightful episode of the Religion Law Podcast. In this episode, we delve into a significant Supreme Court decision and explore the intersection of religious freedom rights with LGBTQ non-discrimination policies. We have previously discussed the 2021 Fulton v. City of Philadelphia case and its impacts, and this episode will share further insights.

Recall, the Catholic charity involved in the case believed in the sacred union of marriage between a man and a woman. Consequently, it would not place a foster child with a gay or lesbian couple or a cohabiting heterosexual couple. Today, we probe why the Supreme Court did not overrule the 1990 decision despite pressures, taking a close look at the City of Philadelphia's non-neutral and generally applicable policies.

Join the host, Michael Fielding, as he breaks down this complex legal decision into understandable terms. Be ready to answer some thought-provoking questions as we navigate the complexities of religious freedom and non-discrimination policies. This episode is an excellent resource for those interested in legal affairs, religion rights, and the LGBTQ community rights.

This episode is not just educational but thought-provoking, intended to shed light on some aspects of our legal system and society. Please share this episode if you find it enlightening, and leave a review. Together, we can influence for good.