No Religious Test Clause

Last updated

The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3: "Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." It immediately follows a clause requiring all federal and state office holders to take an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution. This clause contains the only explicit reference to religion in the original seven articles of the U.S. Constitution.

Contents

The ban on religious tests contained in this clause protects federal officeholders and employees as well as the officeholders of "State Legislatures, and [...] the several states". This clause is cited by advocates of separation of church and state as an example of the "original intent" of the Framers of the Constitution to avoid any entanglement between church and state, or involving the government in any way as a determiner of religious beliefs or practices. This is significant because this clause represents the words of the original Framers, even prior to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Text

... ; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Background

A variety of Test Acts were instituted in England in the 17th and 18th centuries. Their main purpose was to exclude anyone not a member of the Church of England—the official state religion—from holding government office, notably Catholics and "nonconforming" Protestants. Government officials were required to swear oaths, such as the Oath of Supremacy, that the monarch of England was the head of the Church and that they possessed no other foreign loyalties, such as to the pope. Later acts required officials to disavow transubstantiation and the veneration of saints. Such laws were common throughout Europe, where numerous countries had a state religion.

Many colonists of the Thirteen Colonies had left England in part in search of a place where they could practice their own religion. In many cases the colonial governments established an official religion, requiring residents to adhere to the beliefs of the founding sect. [1] With the royal government's religious favoritism fresh in their memory, the Founders sought to prevent the return of the Test Acts by adding this clause to the Constitution. Specifically, Charles Pinckney, delegate from South Carolina—where a Protestant denomination was the established state religion—introduced the clause to Article VI, and it passed with little opposition. [2] [3]

Forced oaths

The Supreme Court has interpreted this provision broadly, saying that any required oath to serve anything other than the Constitution is invalid. In the case of Ex parte Garland , the Court overturned a loyalty oath that the government had tried to apply to pardoned Confederate officials. As the officials had already received full presidential pardons (negating an argument based on their potential status as criminals), the Court ruled that forcing officials and judges to swear loyalty oaths was unconstitutional.

State law

.mw-parser-output .legend{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}.mw-parser-output .legend-color{display:inline-block;min-width:1.25em;height:1.25em;line-height:1.25;margin:1px 0;text-align:center;border:1px solid black;background-color:transparent;color:black}.mw-parser-output .legend-text{} States that have religious qualifications for public office written in their constitutions States that do not have religious qualifications for public office written in their constitutions Religious qualifications for public office in the United States.svg
  States that have religious qualifications for public office written in their constitutions
  States that do not have religious qualifications for public office written in their constitutions

Earlier in U.S. history, the doctrine of states' rights allowed individual states complete discretion regarding the inclusion of a religious test in their state constitutions. In 1961 such religious tests by the states were deemed to be unconstitutional by the extension of the First Amendment provisions to the states (via the incorporation of the 14th Amendment). In the 1961 case Torcaso v. Watkins , the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that such language in state constitutions was in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. [4] Citing the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Establishment Clause in Everson v. Board of Education and linking it to Torcaso v. Watkins, Justice Hugo Black stated for the Court:

We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs.

The Supreme Court did not rule on the applicability of Article VI, stating that "Because we are reversing the judgment on other grounds, we find it unnecessary to consider appellant's contention that this provision applies to state as well as federal offices."

Eight states include language in their constitutions either requiring state officeholders to have particular religious beliefs or specifically protecting those who do. However, the requirements are unenforceable because of the 1961 Supreme Court decision. The states are:

  1. Arkansas (Article 19 Section 1)
  2. Maryland (Declaration of Rights, Article 37)
  3. Mississippi (Article 14, Section 265)
  4. North Carolina (Article 6 Section 8)
  5. Pennsylvania (Article 1 Section 4)
    Specifically protects officeholders with religious belief but is silent on whether those without such beliefs are also protected. [5] The required beliefs include belief in a Supreme Being, and belief in a future state of rewards and punishments.
  6. South Carolina (Article 17 Section 4)
  7. Tennessee (Article 9 Section 2)
  8. Texas (Article 1 Section 4)

Some of these same states also specify that the oath of office include the words "so help me God". In some cases, these beliefs (or oaths) were historically required also of jurors, witnesses in court, notaries public, and state employees. In the 1997 case of Silverman v. Campbell , [6] the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that the state constitution requiring an oath to God for employment in the public sector violated Article VI of the federal constitution, as well as the First and Fourteenth Amendments and therefore could not be enforced. [7]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Article Six of the United States Constitution</span> Provides for the supremacy of federal law over state law, among other provisions

Article Six of the United States Constitution establishes the laws and treaties of the United States made in accordance with it as the supreme law of the land, forbids a religious test as a requirement for holding a governmental position, and holds the United States under the Constitution responsible for debts incurred by the United States under the Articles of Confederation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1791 amendment limiting government restriction of civil rights

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws that: regulate an establishment of religion; prohibit the free exercise of religion; abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Governor of South Carolina</span> Head of state and of government of the U.S. state of South Carolina

The governor of South Carolina is the head of government of South Carolina. The governor is the ex officio commander-in-chief of the National Guard when not called into federal service. The governor's responsibilities include making yearly "State of the State" addresses to the South Carolina General Assembly, submitting an executive budget, and ensuring that state laws are enforced.

Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided 8–1 in favor of the respondent, Edward Schempp, on behalf of his son Ellery Schempp, and declared that school-sponsored Bible reading and the recitation of the Lord's Prayer in public schools in the United States was unconstitutional.

"Separation of church and state" is a metaphor paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson and used by others in discussions regarding the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that applied the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to state law. Prior to this decision, the clause, which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", imposed limits only on the federal government, while many states continued to grant certain religious denominations legislative or effective privileges.

Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court reaffirmed that the United States Constitution prohibits states and the federal government from requiring any kind of religious test for public office, in this specific case as a notary public.

In United States law, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, together with that Amendment's Free Exercise Clause, form the constitutional right of freedom of religion. The relevant constitutional text is:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...

The Free Exercise Clause accompanies the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

The Constitution of the State of North Carolina governs the structure and function of the state government of North Carolina, one of the United States; it is the highest legal document for the state and subjugates North Carolina law.

A religious test is a legal requirement to swear faith to a specific religion or sect, or to renounce the same.

Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda was a 1957 California Courts of Appeal case in the Fellowship of Humanity, an organization of humanists, sought a tax exemption from Alameda County, California on the ground that they used their property "solely and exclusively for religious worship." Despite the group's nontheistic beliefs, the court determined that the activities of the Fellowship of Humanity, which included weekly Sunday meetings, were analogous to the activities of theistic churches and thus entitled to an exemption.

Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment required the government to demonstrate both a compelling interest and that the law in question was narrowly tailored before it denied unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job requirements substantially conflicted with her religion.

Discrimination against atheists, sometimes called atheophobia, atheistophobia, or anti-atheism, both at present and historically, includes persecution of and discrimination against people who are identified as atheists. Discrimination against atheists may be manifested by negative attitudes, prejudice, hostility, hatred, fear, or intolerance towards atheists and atheism or even the complete denial of atheists existence. It is often expressed in distrust regardless of its manifestation. Perceived atheist prevalence seems to be correlated with reduction in prejudice. There is global prevalence of mistrust in moral perceptions of atheists found in even secular countries and among atheists.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of religion in the United States</span> Overview of religious freedom in the United States

In the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally protected right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment. As stated in the Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...". Freedom of religion is linked to the countervailing principle of separation of church and state, a concept advocated by Colonial founders such as Dr. John Clarke, Roger Williams, William Penn, and later Founding Fathers such as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson.

<i>Davis v. Beason</i> 1890 United States Supreme Court case

Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890), was a United States Supreme Court case affirming, by a 9–0 vote, that federal laws against polygamy did not conflict with the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In re Summers, 325 U.S. 561 (1945), is a 5-to-4 ruling by the United States Supreme Court which held that the First and Fourteenth amendment freedoms of a conscientious objector were not infringed when a state bar association declined to admit him to the practice of law. The Illinois Constitution required citizens to serve in the state militia in time of war, and all lawyers admitted to the bar were required to uphold the state constitution. Petitioner Clyde Summers could not uphold that constitutional requirement due to his religious beliefs, and the Supreme Court upheld the denial of his license of practice.

Silverman v. Campbell was a South Carolina Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of a provision in the South Carolina Constitution requiring an oath to God for employment in the public sector.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Religious qualifications for public office in the United States</span>

Religious qualifications for public office in the United States have always been prohibited at the national level of the federal system of government under the Constitution. Article VI of the Constitution of the United States declares that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States". The First Amendment of the Constitution also prevents the Congress of the United States from making any law "respecting an establishment of religion".

Leo Pfeffer was an American lawyer, constitutional scholar, and humanist who was active in movement for religious freedom in the United States, and was one of leading legal proponents of the separation of church and state.

References

  1. ↑ Davis, Kenneth C. (October 2010). "America's True History of Religious Tolerance". Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 25 May 2019.
  2. ↑ Drawn from original source: Charles C. Haynes (1991). "overview: history of religious liberty in America". A Framework for Civic Education. Council for the Advancement of Citizenship and the Center for Civic Education. Archived from the original on 2013-01-15. Retrieved 2012-10-13.
  3. ↑ Drawn from original source: "The Individual Liberties within the Body of the Constitution: A Symposium: The No Religious Test Clause and the Constitution of Religious Liberty: A Machine That Has Gone of Itself." Case Western Reserve Law Review 37: 674–747. Dreisbach, Daniel L. 1999. "The Bill of Rights: Almost an Afterthought?". ABC-CLIO. 2011.
  4. ↑ "Torcaso v. Watkins". Berkeley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs. Georgetown University. Retrieved 25 May 2019.
  5. ↑ "Religious discrimination in state constitutions". Religioustolerance.org. Retrieved 2008-09-06.
  6. ↑ 486 SE.2d 1, 326 S.C. 208 (1997)
  7. ↑ 486 SE.2d 1, 326 S.C. 208 (1997)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.