How is the Free-Exercise Clause understood?
The interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause has always been more contentious than that of the Establishment Clause. The chief question has been, and remains, the extent to which religious believers are free from the constraints that the law would otherwise impose upon other citizens. In brief, the Free Exercise Clause has never been understood to grant an unqualified or absolute right to religious practice. The following key Supreme Court cases are among those that have helped establish the current jurisprudence. Reynolds v. U.S. (1879) In this case the Court evaluated the question of whether the First Amendment excused Mormons, whose religion required polygamy, from obedience to American laws prohibiting the practice. The court held: Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices…. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to
