Reynolds case:
- earliest free-ex case
- outsider groups tend to focus on free-ex
- communitarian viewpoint
- belief v. action
- belief is free
- action can be regulated
- cannot target specific religion
- law of general app:
- burdens free-ex for a few
- when permissible, when not?
- if exception needed, under what conditions?
- constitutional?
- rational basis/goal?
- very low legal standard/threshold
- burdens free-ex for a few
Gobitis case (1940)
- exception?
- exercise in discipline
- rejects JW arguments, upholds salute
Barnette (1943)
- overturns Gobitis
- dissent ultimately replaces majority
- JWs discriminated against in aftermath
- WWII context
- competing interests
- promote patriotism
- free-ex
- coercion not a good basis for unity
- other means available
- strict scrutiny
- compelling interest
- when is imposition of burden allowable?
- clear and present danger
Cantwell v. CT (1940)
- another JW case
- solicitors must have license for door-to-door activity
- unequally applied as a matter of policy
- JWs always denied on application
- eventually stopped applying
- proselytized anyway
- no “time place & manner” restrictions
- anti-Catholic rhetoric
- incitement to riot
x
Advertisements