Question

employment division of oregon v. smith (1990)
facts: what illegal thing did alfred smith do, how did his employer respond, what did smith do next regarding unemployment, and how did the oregon employment division respond? alfred smith was in a religion when he had to ingest a peyote, which is an illegal substance under oregon law. his employer responded by firing alfred for violating the state law.
question: what was the central freedom - of - religion question the supreme court had to address?
decision: what was the courts ultimate decision?

Explanation:

The case involved Alfred Smith ingesting an illegal substance for religious reasons, leading to his firing. The central question was whether the Free - Exercise Clause of the First Amendment allowed an individual to violate a neutral, generally - applicable law for religious reasons. The Supreme Court held that the Free - Exercise Clause does not generally excuse individuals from complying with neutral, generally - applicable laws, even if the law burdens their religious practices.

Answer:

Question: Whether the Free - Exercise Clause of the First Amendment allows an individual to violate a neutral, generally - applicable law for religious reasons.
Decision: The Supreme Court held that the Free - Exercise Clause does not generally excuse individuals from complying with neutral, generally - applicable laws, even if the law burdens their religious practices.