Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-123_g3bi.pdf
Page Number: 52.0

30 

FULTON v. PHILADELPHIA 

ALITO, J., concurring in judgment
ALITO, J., concurring in judgment 

examine how the free-exercise right was understood when 
the First Amendment was adopted. 

By that date, the right to religious liberty already had a 
long, rich, and complex history in this country.  What ap-
pears to be the first “free exercise” provision was adopted in
1649.  Prompted by Lord Baltimore,35 the Maryland Assem-
bly enacted a provision protecting the right of all Christians 
to engage in “the free exercise” of religion.36  Rhode Island’s 
1663  Charter  extended  the  right  to  all.    See  Charter  of 
Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (1663), in Cogan 
34.  Early  colonial  charters  and  agreements  in  Carolina,
Delaware,  New  Jersey,  New  York,  and  Pennsylvania  also 
recognized the right to free exercise,37 and by 1789, every 

—————— 
Polygamy:  The  Relevance  of  Nineteenth-Century  Cases  and  Commen-
taries  for  Contemporary  Debates  About  Free  Exercise  Exemptions,  85 
Ore. L. Rev. 369 (2006) (Lombardi, Free Exercise); Muñoz, The Original 
Meaning of the Free Exercise Clause: The Evidence From the First Con-
gress, 31 Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol’y 1083 (2008) (Muñoz, Original Mean-
ing); Nestor, Note, The Original Meaning and Significance of Early State
Provisos to the Free Exercise of Religion, 42 Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol’y 971
(2019)  (Nestor);  M.  Nussbaum,  Liberty  of  Conscience  120–130  (2008); 
Walsh,  The  First  Free  Exercise  Case,  73  Geo.  Wash.  L.  Rev.  1  (2004)
(Walsh). 

35  McConnell,  Origins  1425  (describing  Lord  Baltimore’s  directive  to 
the new Protestant governor and councilors of Maryland to refrain from 
interfering  with  the  “free  exercise”  of  Christians,  particularly  Roman 
Catholics). 

36  Act  Concerning  Religion  (1649),  in  Cogan  17;  see  also  McConnell, 

Origins 1425. 

37 See Second Charter of Carolina (1665), in Cogan 27–28 (recognizing
the right of persons to “freely and quietly have and enjoy . . . their Judg-
ments and Consciences, in Matters of Religion” and declaring that “no 
Person . . . shall be in any way molested, punished, disquieted, or called
in Question, for any Differences in Opinion, or Practice in Matters of re-
ligious  Concernments,  who  do  not  actually  disturb  the  Civil  Peace”);
Charter of Delaware, Art. I (1701), in id., at 15 (ensuring “[t]hat no per-
son . . . who shall confess and acknowledge One Almighty God . . . shall 
be in any case molested or prejudiced, in his . . . person or estate, because 
of his . . . consciencious persuasion or practice, nor . . . to do or suffer any