Sherbert v. Verner
Encyclopedia
Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398
(1963), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
held that the Free Exercise Clause
of the First Amendment
required that government demonstrate a compelling government interest before denying unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job conflicted with her religion.
The case established the Sherbert Test, requiring demonstration of such a compelling interest in Free Exercise cases. This test was eventually all-but-eliminated in Employment Division v. Smith
494 U.S. 872
(1990). However, it was resurrected by Congress in the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act
(RFRA) of 1993, but the Court in City of Boerne v. Flores
, 521 U.S. 507
(1997) and Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal
, 546 U.S. 418 (2006), limited its application to federal laws only.
, worked as a textile-mill operator. Two years after her conversion to that faith, her employer switched from a five-day to a six-day workweek, including Saturdays. Since according to her belief, God in Exodus 20:8-11 forbade working on Saturdays (seventh day is the Sabbath), she refused to work that day and was fired. Sherbert could not find any other work and applied for unemployment compensation. Her claim was denied, and the Employment Security Commission's decision was affirmed by a state trial court and the Southern Carolina Supreme Court.
by establishing the Seventh-day Adventist religion. Finally, the majority opinion did not consider the Equal Protection
argument, since it had already ruled in Sherbert's favor on First Amendment grounds.
Stewart concurred in the result, but not in the majority's reasoning. He did not dismiss the Establishment Clause issue as the majority did. Instead, he identified as a "double-barreled dilemma" between Free Exercise Clause protection of Sherbert's actions and — as it had been interpreted, wrongly in his view, by the court — Establishment Clause prohibition of such protection. He also disagreed with the majority's claim that a cited precedent, Braunfeld v. Brown
, was distinguishable from Sherbert.
For the individual, the court must determine
If these two elements are established, then the government must prove
. In Smith, the court held that free exercise exemptions were not required from generally applicable laws. In response to the Smith decision, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
of 1993 (RFRA) to reinstate the Sherbert Test. It purported to restore strict scrutiny analysis to all free exercise cases in which the plaintiff proves a substantial burden on the free exercise of his or her religion. However, four years later, the court struck down RFRA as applied to Constitutional interpretation. In City of Boerne v. Flores
, 521 U.S. 507 (1997), the court found that RFRA, as applied to the Free Exercise Clause, impermissibly interfered with the judiciary's sole power to interpret the Constitution. However, this ruling did not necessarily limit RFRA's effect on interpretation of federal statutes. In fact, the court upheld RFRA as applied to other federal statutes in Gonzales v. UDV
, 546 U.S. 418 (2006). In UDV, the court applied the statutory Sherbert Test created by RFRA and found that the action in question—use of a Schedule I drug in a religious ritual—was protected under the First Amendment.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1963), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
held that the Free Exercise Clause
Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment
The Free Exercise Clause is the accompanying clause with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:...
of the First Amendment
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering...
required that government demonstrate a compelling government interest before denying unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job conflicted with her religion.
The case established the Sherbert Test, requiring demonstration of such a compelling interest in Free Exercise cases. This test was eventually all-but-eliminated in Employment Division v. Smith
Employment Division v. Smith
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 , is a United States Supreme Court case that determined 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...
494 U.S. 872
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1990). However, it was resurrected by Congress in the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488 , codified at through , is a 1993 United States federal law aimed at preventing laws that substantially burden a person's free exercise of their religion. The bill was introduced by Howard McKeon of California and...
(RFRA) of 1993, but the Court in City of Boerne v. Flores
City of Boerne v. Flores
City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 , was a Supreme Court case concerning the scope of Congress's enforcement power under the fifth section of the Fourteenth Amendment...
, 521 U.S. 507
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1997) and Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal
Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal
Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 , is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court involving the Federal Government's seizure of a sacramental tea, containing a Schedule I substance, from a New Mexican branch of the Brazilian church União do Vegetal...
, 546 U.S. 418 (2006), limited its application to federal laws only.
Background of the case
Adell Sherbert, a member of the Seventh-day Adventist ChurchSeventh-day Adventist Church
The Seventh-day Adventist Church is a Protestant Christian denomination distinguished by its observance of Saturday, the original seventh day of the Judeo-Christian week, as the Sabbath, and by its emphasis on the imminent second coming of Jesus Christ...
, worked as a textile-mill operator. Two years after her conversion to that faith, her employer switched from a five-day to a six-day workweek, including Saturdays. Since according to her belief, God in Exodus 20:8-11 forbade working on Saturdays (seventh day is the Sabbath), she refused to work that day and was fired. Sherbert could not find any other work and applied for unemployment compensation. Her claim was denied, and the Employment Security Commission's decision was affirmed by a state trial court and the Southern Carolina Supreme Court.
The court's decision
The Supreme Court in a 7-2 decision reversed the Commission and the lower courts, finding that denying Sherbert's claim was an unconstitutional burden on the free exercise of her religion. The majority opinion effectively created the Sherbert Test, determining whether government action runs afoul of the Free Exercise Clause.Brennan's majority opinion
Brennan, writing for the majority, stated that denial of Sherbert's unemployment claim represented a substantial burden upon her. Even if that burden took the form of denial of a privilege to unemployment compensation, instead of violating compensation she was entitled to by right, it still effectively impeded her free exercise of her religion. As Brennan wrote, "to condition the availability of benefits upon this appellant's willingness to violate a cardinal principle of her religious faith effectively penalizes the free exercise of her constitutional liberties." Brennan dismissed the claim that his decision violated the Establishment ClauseEstablishment Clause of the First Amendment
The Establishment Clause is the first of several pronouncements in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating, Together with the Free Exercise Clause The Establishment Clause is the first of several pronouncements in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,...
by establishing the Seventh-day Adventist religion. Finally, the majority opinion did not consider the Equal Protection
Equal Protection Clause
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"...
argument, since it had already ruled in Sherbert's favor on First Amendment grounds.
Douglas and Stewart's concurring opinions
Douglas wrote separately to explain that the issue was not the degree of injury to Sherbert, but South Carolina's denial of unemployment on the basis of her beliefs. The issue was not individual action, but government action, and under what basis government could deny someone benefits.Stewart concurred in the result, but not in the majority's reasoning. He did not dismiss the Establishment Clause issue as the majority did. Instead, he identified as a "double-barreled dilemma" between Free Exercise Clause protection of Sherbert's actions and — as it had been interpreted, wrongly in his view, by the court — Establishment Clause prohibition of such protection. He also disagreed with the majority's claim that a cited precedent, Braunfeld v. Brown
Braunfeld v. Brown
Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599 , was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court. In a 6-3 decision, the Court held that a Pennsylvania law forbidding the sale of various retail products on Sunday was not an unconstitutional interference with religion as described in the First Amendment to...
, was distinguishable from Sherbert.
Harlan's dissenting opinion
Harlan, in a characteristically formalist reading of the relevant law, argued that the Commission denied Sherbert unemployment based on the same reason they might any secular claimant, that she was not "available for work." More centrally, he rejected the majority opinion, arguing that the Free Exercise Clause only required neutrality toward religion in this case, which would not include exempting Sherbert, though the Constitution would permit a legislature to create such an exemption.The Sherbert Test
The Sherbert Test consists of four criteria that are used to determine if an individual's right to religious free exercise has been violated by the government. The test is as follows:For the individual, the court must determine
- whether the person has a claim involving a sincere religious belief, and
- whether the government action is a substantial burden on the person’s ability to act on that belief.
If these two elements are established, then the government must prove
- that it is acting in furtherance of a "compelling state interest," and
- that it has pursued that interest in the manner least restrictive, or least burdensome, to religion.
Limiting of the Sherbert Test
The Supreme Court sharply curtailed the Sherbert Test in the 1980s, culminating in the 1990 landmark case Employment Division v. SmithEmployment Division v. Smith
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 , is a United States Supreme Court case that determined 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...
. In Smith, the court held that free exercise exemptions were not required from generally applicable laws. In response to the Smith decision, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488 , codified at through , is a 1993 United States federal law aimed at preventing laws that substantially burden a person's free exercise of their religion. The bill was introduced by Howard McKeon of California and...
of 1993 (RFRA) to reinstate the Sherbert Test. It purported to restore strict scrutiny analysis to all free exercise cases in which the plaintiff proves a substantial burden on the free exercise of his or her religion. However, four years later, the court struck down RFRA as applied to Constitutional interpretation. In City of Boerne v. Flores
City of Boerne v. Flores
City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 , was a Supreme Court case concerning the scope of Congress's enforcement power under the fifth section of the Fourteenth Amendment...
, 521 U.S. 507 (1997), the court found that RFRA, as applied to the Free Exercise Clause, impermissibly interfered with the judiciary's sole power to interpret the Constitution. However, this ruling did not necessarily limit RFRA's effect on interpretation of federal statutes. In fact, the court upheld RFRA as applied to other federal statutes in Gonzales v. UDV
Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal
Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 , is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court involving the Federal Government's seizure of a sacramental tea, containing a Schedule I substance, from a New Mexican branch of the Brazilian church União do Vegetal...
, 546 U.S. 418 (2006). In UDV, the court applied the statutory Sherbert Test created by RFRA and found that the action in question—use of a Schedule I drug in a religious ritual—was protected under the First Amendment.
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 374
- Free Exercise Clause of the First AmendmentFree Exercise Clause of the First AmendmentThe Free Exercise Clause is the accompanying clause with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:...
- Strict scrutinyStrict scrutinyStrict scrutiny is the most stringent standard of judicial review used by United States courts. It is part of the hierarchy of standards that courts use to weigh the government's interest against a constitutional right or principle. The lesser standards are rational basis review and exacting or...
- Lemon Test