Employees of a department store were fined for selling items on Sunday that were not
included in the limited grouping of materials that could be sold on that day. The
accepted items included: tobacco products, confectioneries, milk, bread, fruit,
gasoline, oils, greases, drugs, medicines, newspapers, and periodicals. The employees
claimed that the laws violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses because they
were based on specific religious beliefs.
The Court ruled that Maryland’s Sunday closing laws had evolved into furthering secular
ends and therefore did not violate the Establishment Clause.
|
Majority Opinion: (Chief Justice Warren) |
The petitioners use the religious freedom argument but allege only economic harm rather
than an infringement on their own religious beliefs. Because they do not mention their
own religious beliefs they do not have standing to make a religious liberty argument.
To rule on the Establishment argument, the Court must determine whether these laws that
were instituted for religious reasons retain their religious character. The acceptance
of Sunday as a day of rest is often supported for secular reasons. “In light of the
evolution of our Sunday Closing Laws through the centuries, and of their more or less
recent emphasis upon secular considerations, it is not difficult to discern that as
presently written and administered, most of them, at least, are of a secular rather than
of a religious character, and that presently they bear no relationship to establishment
of religion as those words are used in the Constitution of the United States.” Among
the secular reasons for these laws is to “provid[e] a Sunday atmosphere of recreation,
cheerfulness, repose, and enjoyment.” These benefits could not be achieved if Maryland
allowed people to selects one day each week to set aside their work.
This decision permits laws with religious origins to remain so long as they currently
further secular ends. These Sunday closing laws have evolved into constitutionally
acceptable laws because of the ways that they are viewed by those who advocate them.
Copyright © The Religious Freedom Page.
|
