WebEmployment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 485 U. S. 660, 670 (1988) (Smith 1). We noted, however, that the Oregon Supreme Court had not decided whether respondents' sacramental use of peyote was in fact proscribed by Oregon's controlled substance law, and that this issue was a matter of dispute between the parties. WebEmployment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon Respondent Alfred Smith et al. Location Oregon Department of Human Resources Docket no. 88-1213 …
Smith v. Employment Division :: 1988 :: Oregon Supreme Court …
WebDepartment of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith Citation. 494 U.S. 872 (1990). Brief Fact Summary. The Respondents, Smith and others (Respondents), were discharged … Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), is a United States Supreme Court case that held 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 part of a religious ritual. Although states have the power to accommodate otherwise illegal acts performed in pursuit of religious beliefs, they are not required to do so. hsds.lanzouf.com/i1kzr042oc6j
The Smith Decision Pew Research Center
WebEMPLOYMENT DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES OF THE STATE OF OREGON, ET AL. v. SMITH. No. 86-946. Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 8, 1987. Decided April 27, 1988 [1] CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF OREGON. [661] William F. Gary, Deputy Attorney General of Oregon, argued the … WebThe Oregon Employment Division denied them unemployment compensation because it deemed they were fired for work-related "misconduct." The Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that this violated their religious free exercise rights provided by the First Amendment. ... "Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of the State of Oregon v. … WebSmith v. Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources, 301 Ore. 209, 217-219, 721 P.2d 445, 449-450 (1986). We granted certiorari. 480 U.S. 916 (1987). Before this Court in 1987, petitioner continued to maintain that the illegality of respondents' peyote consumption was relevant to their constitutional claim. hobby lobby stem flowers