Summary

Portrait of Harry Blackmun Harry Blackmun Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon v…

The State's interest in enforcing its prohibition, in order to be sufficiently compelling to outweigh a free exercise claim, cannot be merely abstract or symbolic. The State cannot plausibly assert that unbending application of a criminal prohibition is essential to fulfill any compelling interest, if it does not, in fact, attempt to enforce that prohibition. In this case, the State actually has not evinced any concrete interest in enforcing its drug laws against religious users of peyote.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Harry Blackmun Harry Blackmun Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon v…

That the State might grant an exemption for religious peyote use, but deny other religious claims arising in different circumstances, would not violate the Establishment Clause. Though the State must treat all religions equally, and not favor one over another, this obligation is fulfilled by the uniform application of the "compelling interest" test to all free exercise claims, not by reaching uniform results as to all claims.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature