# data[].attributes.body
First amendment
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

# data[].attributes.body
This means that Americans are free to practice whatever religion and cannot be forced to practice one religion. This also means that religion should not be associated with the government.

# data[].attributes.body
This right was written in the constitution and has undergone many changes and new interpretations through out the years since it was established through court cases.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1st Amendment and Freedom of Religion | American Government

# data[].attributes.body
Overview of the case: The New York State Board of Regents authorized a short, voluntary prayer for recitation at the start of each school day. A group of organizations joined forces in challenging the prayer, claiming that it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The New York Court of Appeals rejected their arguments.

Decision: 6-1 decision for Engel

This was a pivotal point because it established that in public schools or institutions, a prayer was not allowed to be said at the beginning of a school day, even if it is deemed nondenominational and voluntary.

# data[].attributes.body
Overview of the case: The Arkansas legislature passed a law prohibiting teachers in public or state-supported schools from teaching, or using textbooks that teach, human evolution. Epperson, a public school teacher, sued, claiming the law violated her First Amendment right to free speech as well as the Establishment Clause. The State Chancery Court ruled that it violated her free speech rights; the State Supreme Court reversed.

Decision: Unanimous for Epperson

This was a pivotal point because the justices believed "that the law had been based solely on the beliefs of fundamentalist Christians, who felt that evolutionary theories directly contradicted the biblical account of Creation". During this time, there were many parts of the south that banned the learning of evolution, and this case established that they cannot do that.

# data[].attributes.headline
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith (1990)

# data[].attributes.subject
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith (1990)

# data[].attributes.body
Overview of the case: Two counselors for a private drug rehabilitation organization ingested peyote -- a powerful hallucinogen -- as part of their religious ceremonies as members of the Native American Church. As a result of this conduct, the rehabilitation organization fired the counselors. The counselors filed a claim for unemployment compensation. The government denied them benefits because the reason for their dismissal was considered work-related "misconduct."

Decision: 6-3 for Employment Division

This was a pivotal decision because it established that even if the drugs were taken for religious purposes, they were still illegal and the employees could be fired for the use of them. It basically enforced that religion isn't an excuse for someone to not obey a law.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1961/468
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/7
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1989/88-1213

# data[].attributes.headline
A new supreme court case Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020)

# data[].attributes.subject
A new supreme court case Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020)

# data[].attributes.body
Petitioners Kendra Espinoza and others are low-income mothers who applied for scholarships to keep their children enrolled in Stillwater Christian School, in Kalispell, Montana. The Montana legislature enacted a tax-credit scholarship program in 2015 to provide a modest tax credit to individuals and businesses who donate to private, nonprofit scholarship organizations. Shortly after the program was started, the Montana Department of Revenue created an administrative rule (“Rule 1”) prohibiting scholarship recipients from using their scholarships at religious schools, showing of the state constitution that prohibits “direct or indirect” public funding of religiously affiliated educational programs. Does a state law that allows for funding for education generally while prohibiting funding for religious schools violate the Religion Clauses or the Equal Protection Clause of the federal Constitution?

# data[].attributes.body
More than 16,000 law enforcement agencies reported a total of 7,120 bias- or prejudice-motivated crimes in 2018, down 55 crimes from 2017. But crimes against people, which includes murder, rape, aggravated assault, simple assault and intimidation, reached a 16-year high at 4,571 hate crimes, The New York Times reported. Even though we have the freedom of religion and it has been granted as a basic right in our country, there are people who want to take it away from people who practice specific religions.