Document: 450 U.S. 707 101 S.Ct. 1425 67 L.Ed.2d 624 Eddie C. THOMAS, Petitioner,v.REVIEW BOARD OF the INDIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DIVISION et al. No. 79-952. Argued Oct. 7, 1980. Decided April 6, 1981. Syllabus Petitioner, a Jehovah's Witness, was initially hired to work in his employer's roll foundry, which fabricated sheet steel for variety of industrial uses, but when foundry closed he transferred department that turrets military tanks. Since all remaining departments transfer might have been sought were engaged directly production weapons, petitioner asked be laid off. When request denied, quit, asserting religious beliefs prevented him from participating weapons. He applied unemployment compensation benefits under Indiana Employment Security Act, and testified at an administrative hearing believed contributing arms violated religion, although could, good conscience, engage indirectly materials used ultimately fabricate arms. The referee found had terminated employment because convictions, held not entitled voluntary termination based upon "good cause [arising] connection with [his] work," as required by statute. Respondent Review Board affirmed, Court Appeals reversed, holding statute, applied, improperly burdened petitioner's right free exercise religion. Supreme vacated Appeals' decision denied benefits, quit voluntarily personal reasons, belief being more "personal philosophical choice" than belief. court also concluded any event motivated religion is cause" objectively related work, denying created only indirect burden on right, justified legitimate state interests. Held: State's denial First Amendment Sherbert v. Verner, 374 398, 83 1790, 10 965. Pp. 713-720. (a) relied facts "struggling" able "articulate" precisely. Courts should undertake dissect such grounds. erred apparently giving significant weight fact another Witness whom consulted no scruples about working tank turrets. guarantee limited are shared members sect. narrow function reviewing this context determine whether there appropriate finding forbidden record shows reasons. 713-716. (b) A person may compelled choose between participation otherwise available public program. It true law does compel violation where conditions receipt important benefit conduct prescribed faith, or it denies mandated belief, thereby putting substantial pressure adherent modify behavior violate beliefs, exists. While compulsion indirect, infringement nonetheless substantial. 716-718. (c) justify inroad liberty showing least restrictive means achieving some compelling interest. However, inquiry properly narrowed focus threat interests, neither purposes urged sustain disqualifying provision statute—to avoid widespread consequent fund resulting if people permitted leave jobs "personal" detailed probing employers into job applicants' beliefs—is sufficiently liberty. 718-719. (d) Payment would involve State fostering faith Establishment Clause. extension reflects governmental obligation neutrality, represent involvement secular institutions object Clause forestall. 719-720. Ind., 391 N.E.2d 1127, reversed. Blanca Bianchi de la Torre, Gary, petitioner. William E. Daily, Indianapolis, respondents. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion Court. 1 We granted certiorari consider petitioner, who forbade armaments, constituted 444 1070, 100 1012, 62 751 (1980). 2 * Thomas Blaw-Knox Foundry & Machinery Co. produced claimed war materials. respondent applying provisions Act.1 3 Thomas, Blaw-Knox. uses. On application form, listed membership Witnesses, noted hobbies Bible study reading. placed employment; did describe tenets detail form. 4 Approximately year later, closed, first day new job, realized doing weapons related. checked bulletin board in-plant openings listed, discovered resolve problem, layoff. could without violating principles show offered nonweapons employer, available. 5 Upon leaving Blaw-Knox, Act.2 At represented counsel, said turret line involved producing war, employee—a friend fellow Witness. advised parts "unscriptural." "rest with" view, however. friend's view less strict reading Witnesses' own. 6 explain what kind convictions permit, difficulty type done foundry. arms—for example, employee raw material supplier foundry.3 7 Thomas' specifically precluded aiding manufacture items warfare.4 these convictions. reported: 8 "Claimant continually searched so armament related; however, materialize, prior date leaving, claimant requested layoff, denied; November 1975, due convictions."5 9 Accordingly, benefits. adopted referee's findings conclusions, affirmed benefits.6 Appeals, accepting "due convictions," reversed Board, § 22-4-15-1, ordered extend Thomas. Ind.App., 65 Ind.Dec. 238, 381 888 (1978). 11 Indiana, dividing 3-2, 1127 (1979). With reference said: 12 "It intended facilitate changing provide relief those Voluntary compensable purpose persons unemployed through fault their 13 "Good justifies must job-related objective character." N.E.2d, 1129 (footnotes omitted). 14 therefore qualify 1130. 15 In discussing claim, stated: "A choice rather choice, rise level amendment claim." 1131. basis precise nature unclear—but Nonetheless, that, even assuming benefits: law, work. 16 create interest preserving integrity insurance maintaining stable force encouraging workers 17 Finally, awarding terminates while terminate other nonreligious Amendment. 18 judgment review examined light our decisions, particularly 965 (1963). II 19 Only rooted protected Free Exercise Clause, which, its terms, gives special protection supra; Wis- consin Yoder, 406 205, 215-216, 92 1526, 1533, 32 (1972). determination "religious" practice often difficult delicate task, division attests.7 resolution question turn judicial perception particular question; need acceptable, logical, consistent, comprehensible others order merit protection. 20 support claim testified: 21 "Q. And then comes actually itself, hammering out; you will do. . 22 "A. That's that's I'm daily faced knowledge 23 24 I really not, know, conscientiously continue armaments. against come learn. ." 1132. 25 Based testimony, "quit convictions."8 finding,9 challenged 26 took different record. "although claimant's reasons quitting described religious, unclear was, was."10 court's made merely choice."11 27 reaching conclusion, seems considerable reliance noted, admitted before 28 "working United States Steel Inland produc[ing] product necessary [because I] direct party whoever they shipped [and] chargeable conscience. 29 position inconsistent stated opposition But statements reveal insulated war. see, therefore, drew line, us say unreasonable one. believer admits articulated clarity precision sophisticated employ. 30 appears given turrets; least, "scripturally" acceptable. Intrafaith differences uncommon among followers creed, process singularly ill equipped relation Religion Clauses. One can, course, imagine asserted bizarre, clearly motivation, Clause; case here, Particularly sensitive area, within competence inquire worker correctly perceived commands common faith. arbiters scriptural interpretation. 31 honest conviction Not surprisingly, eye microscopic examination exercised appellate review. confined conclusions drawn. record, clear III A. More years ago, 33 "exclude individual Catholics, Lutherans, Mohammedans, Baptists, Jews, Methodists, Non-believers, Presbyterians, lack it, receiving welfare legislation." Everson Education, 330 1, 16, 504, 511, 91 L.Ed. 711 (1947) (emphasis deleted). 34 Later, Sherbert, South Carolina's attempt deny Sabbatarian declined Saturday. sustaining her receive held: 35 "The ruling [disqualifying Mrs. refusal Saturday faith] forces following precepts forfeiting one hand, abandoning accept hand. Governmental imposition puts same fine imposed [her] worship." U.S., 404, S.Ct., 1794. 36 argues, held, here consequence legislation has authority enact. "Neutral standards met compensation." requires applicants left work." Ibid. 37 similar argument rejected But, "this beginning, end, inquiry." 403-404, ways we "[a] regulation neutral face may, application, offend constitutional requirement neutrality unduly burdens religion." Wisconsin 220, 1535. Cf. Walz Tax Comm'n, 397 664, 90 1409, 697 (1970). 38 Here, put fidelity cessation work; coercive impact indistinguishable 39 "[N]ot apparent appellant's declared ineligibility derives solely forego, unmistakable." 40 Where proscribed 41 respondents contend inapposite because, case, dismissed action. see she refused Saturdays after plant went 6-day workweek. Had simply presented himself perform assigned assumed he, like action, both cases, flowed employment, once became religiously objectionable changed conditions. B 42 mere program mean exemption accommodating granted. still "[t]he essence written subject interests highest can overbalance claims supra, 215, 1533. 43 scheme twofold: (1) reasons;12 (2) beliefs. These unimportant considerations. narrowed, conclude advanced do 44 There evidence indicate number find themselves predicament choosing large enough "widespread unemployment," seriously affect unemployment—and Board. Similarly, undesirable, inquiries occur occurred states position. Nor reason believe terminating great motivate make inquiries. 45 Neither unless, payment IV 46 payments involves is, sense, "benefit" deriving manifests tension two Religious Clauses resolved Sherbert: 47 "In do, plainly 'establishment' Seventh-day Adventist Carolina, Sabbatarians Sunday worshippers nothing differences, forestall." 409, 1796. 48 See 220-221, 1535-1536; 668-669, 1411; O'Hair Andrus, 198 U.S.App.D.C. 198, 201-204, 613 F.2d 931, 934-937 (1979) (Leventhal, J.). 49 Unless prepared overrule cannot referee, 50 Reversed. 51 BLACKMUN joins Parts I, II, Court's opinion. As Part thereof, concurs result. 52 REHNQUIST, dissenting. 53 today holds constitutionally financial assistance Because adds mud already muddied waters jurisprudence, dissent. 54 acknowledges "tension" Constitution. Although relationship much commentary, fairly recent vintage, unknown time framing adoption causes tension, me, threefold. First, growth social during latter part 20th century greatly magnified potential conflict Clauses, since touches many points life. Second, "incorporated" Fourteenth applicable States, Stromberg California, 283 359, 532, 75 1117 (1931); Cantwell Connecticut, 310 296, 60 900, 84 1213 (1940), similarly multiplied instances arise. third, perhaps most important, overly expansive interpretation By broadly construing constantly channel Scylla Charybdis federal action pass survive scrutiny. 55 None developments foreseen framed well Federal Government real sense considered government delegated powers. Indeed, principal adopting Constitution "Bill Rights" enactment undesirable unnecessary Government. So long enacts little legislation, 1791, few occasions conflict. Moreover, originally enacted, Government, States. Barron Baltimore, Pet. 243, 672 (1833). Framers hardly anticipate superseded "selective incorporation" doctrine Court, expanded statutes challenge drafted either incorporation Amendment, know how scope 56 illustrates far astray gone interpreting recognizes help offer meaningful guidance courts decide cases day-by-day basis. Instead, asserts leaves case-by-case suggested above, largely own making, diminish almost vanishing point interpreted. 57 Just (1963), reads warranted. proper Braunfeld Brown, 366 599, 81 1144, 563 (1961), dissent Sherbert. Braunfeld, closing laws rights Sabbatarians. Warren explained statute unlawful practices appellants; expensive. "[t]o strike down, critical scrutiny, imposes i. e. notmake radically restrict operating latitude legislature." 606, 1147. Likewise discriminated Where, enacted general effect advance goals, my require conform dictates conscience group. Harlan recognized supra: "Those situations treatment account between." Id., 423, 1804. Like grant exemptions regulations,1 so. 422-423, 1803-1804.2 58 issue equally unsatisfying. today's blandly assures us, just "plainly" foster "establishment" Ante, 719. agree interpreted, chose below cases. Those faithfully hold 59 STEWART concurring 414-417, 1799-1801. observed decisions rendered today, squarely extreme language (1949), bespeaks "government stripped power support, assist religions .," "can aid [or] religions." 11, 15, 509, 511. Torcaso Watkins, 367 488, 495, 1680, 1683, 982 "constitutionally impose requirements non-believers." Abington School District Schempp, 203, 217, 1560, 1568, 844 Rutledge's words forbids " 'every form religion.' Engel Vitale, 370 421, 431, 82 1261, 1267, 601 (1962). moved away mechanistic "no-aid-to-religion" approach three-part test constitutionality Lemon Kurtzman, 403 602, 2105, 745 (1971); Committee Public Education Nyquist, 413 756, 772-773, 93 2955, 2965, 948 (1973). serve legislative purpose. "primary effect" advances nor inhibits administration excessive entanglement 61 surprising makes apply case. If legislate requires—an reasons—the interpreted Nyquist. whole purpose, proviso sole doubt primary "advance" facilitating Third, including surely "entangle" tax exemptions, Walz, award tuition grants credits, granting necessarily sincerely held. Otherwise dissatisfied it. temporarily retreated wholly abandoned welcome latter. think questions, STEWART, dissenting accurately reach proselytizing activities sects throwing authorit[ies] behind dissemination tenets." 314, 1619. McCollum 333 248, 68 461, 483, 649 (1948) (Reed, J., dissenting) (impermissible "purposeful church itself group performing ecclesiastical functions"). Conversely, "inducing" instead "accommodates" implements independent impermissibly choices chosen pay permissible redounds individual. Accord, Wolman Walter, 433 229, 97 2593, 714 (1977) (upholding various disbursements pupils parochial schools). 63 sum, too fails acknowledge conflicts such, exacerbates construe circumstances between. heartily tacit abandonment rhetoric regret way restore greater degree flexibility Governments legislating consistently affirm Code 22-4-15-1 (Supp.1978) provides: "With respect periods extended established subsequent July 1974, 3, 1977, discharged shall ineligible waiting period week separation until subsequently earned remuneration equal exceeding weekly amount each ten (10) weeks. weeks disqualification expiration individual's carried forward falls consecutive beginning Ind. 22-4-1-1 seq. (1976 Supp.1978). reasonable assume processed tanks weapons; contains point. indicated, App. Cert. 2a: reveals approximate [sic ] three 'Roll Foundry' permanently terret line. [He], time, functions Company Armament Industry. Claimant's exempts advancement war." 2a-3a added petitioner). id., 5a: indicates allow See, g., (1961); Ballard, 322 78, 64 882, 88 1148 (1944). n. 4, text 5, supra. 1133. interest—the 407, 1795, Even decided, grounds unjustifiably extends Ind.Code (Supp.1978), provides "individual employment" disqualified "found unclear" 713. failure accepts rejects State, suggests purely choices" true, implications enormous. Persons jobs, assert collect insurance. expect funds allotted quickly depleted. addition, 401, n.4, 1792, suggest negative implication every reason" reasons." construed subjective disqualification. Geckler Bd. Div., 244 473, 193 357 This thus distinguishable reason, prohibited To extent argued (1948); (1962); (1963); (1973), wrongly decided. "aid" significantly different, degree, afforded For refusing reimbursement students attend schools. allocate education, so, sacrifice obtain education. Lemon, 665, 2137 (opinion WHITE, J.); 798-805, 2978-2992 BURGER, education answers moral questions teaches answers, sacrifices attending sufficient permit individuals.

Category: 2