Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-123_g3bi.pdf
Page Number: 57.0

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

35 

ALITO, J., concurring in judgment 

—————— 
man  disturb  the  peace,  the  happiness  or  safety  of  society”  (emphasis 
added)); Md. Declaration of Rights, Art. 33 (1776), in id., at 17 (“That as
it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks
most acceptable to him, all persons professing the christian religion are 
equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty, wherefore no per-
son ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate on account of
his religious persuasion or profession, or for his religious practice, unless 
under colour of religion any man shall disturb the good order, peace or 
safety of the state, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others, 
in  their  natural,  civil  or  religious  rights”  (emphasis  added));  Mass. 
Const., pt. I, Art. II (1780), in id., at 20–21 (“It is the right as well as the 
duty of all men in society, publickly, and at stated seasons, to worship 
the  SUPREME  BEING,  the  Great  Creator  and  Preserver  of  the  Uni-
verse.  And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his per-
son, liberty, or estate, for worshipping GOD in the manner and season 
most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious 
profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the publick peace, 
or  obstruct  others  in  their  religious  worship”  (emphasis  added));  N. H. 
Const., pt. I, Art. V (1783), in id., at 22–23 (“Every individual has a nat-
ural and unalienable right to worship GOD according to the dictates of 
his own conscience, and reason; and no subject shall be hurt, molested, 
or restrained in his person, liberty or estate for worshipping GOD in the 
manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience, 
. . .  provided  he  doth  not  disturb  the  public  peace,  or  disturb  others  in 
their  religious  worship”  (emphasis  added));  N. Y.  Const.,  Art.  XXXVIII 
(1777), in id., at 26 (“[T]he free Exercise and Enjoyment of religious Pro-
fession and Worship, without Discrimination or Preference, shall forever 
hereafter be allowed within this State to all Mankind.  Provided, That 
the Liberty of Conscience hereby granted, shall not be so construed, as 
to excuse Acts of Licentiousness, or justify Practices inconsistent with the 
Peace or Safety of this State” (some emphasis added)); Charter of Rhode
Island and Providence Plantations (1663), in id., at 34 (guaranteeing free 
exercise for matters that “do not Actually disturb the Civil Peace of Our 
said  Colony”  so  long  as  persons  “[b]ehav[e]  themselves  Peaceably  and 
Quietly, And [do] not Us[e] This Liberty to Licentiousness and Prophane-
ness;  nor  to  the  Civil  Injury,  or  outward  Disturbance  of  others”  (some 
emphasis  added));  S. C.  Const.,  Art.  VIII, §1  (1790),  in id.,  at  41  (“The
free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without 
discrimination or preference, shall, forever hereafter, be allowed within 
this state to all mankind; provided that the liberty of conscience thereby 
declared  shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or 
justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this state” (em-
phasis added)).