Tasia Alston

Religious Liberty

Suzanne Jacobs

October 1, 2023

Religion, Government, and the Public Sphere: Analyzing Reynolds v. United States (1871)

Expanding upon the complex relationship between religion, government, and the public

sphere in the United States, it becomes evident that this intricate interplay has not only been a

defining aspect of American society but has also evolved over time. Reynolds v. United States

(1871) stands as a prominent illustration of this evolving dynamic. This landmark Supreme Court

case confronted the contentious issue of polygamy and the boundaries of religious freedom,

providing valuable insights into the ongoing tension between the cherished right to religious

liberty and the government's authority to regulate practices that it deems detrimental to the public

interest.

Reynolds v. United States (1871) occupies a significant place in American legal history.

George Reynolds, a member of the LDS Church, invoked the First Amendment's free exercise

clause to defend his practice of polygamy, arguing that it was an integral aspect of his religious

beliefs. However, the Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, ruled against him, establishing a

precedent that the government possessed the authority to restrict certain religious practices, like

polygamy, when they posed a threat to public order and safety. This ruling showcased that

religious liberty, while fundamental, was not an absolute right and could be circumscribed when

necessary to preserve the broader welfare of society.

 The case also unveiled a plethora of critical issues that continue to shape the intricate

relationship between religion, government, and the public sphere in the United States. Firstly,

Reynolds v. United States spotlighted the precarious equilibrium between religious freedom and

the government's duty to protect the public interest. The Court's decision underscored that even

deeply held religious practices could be curtailed when they ran afoul of established laws and

societal norms vital for maintaining social order and harmony.

Secondly, the case ventured into the realm of the Establishment Clause, which

complements the Free Exercise Clause in the First Amendment. While the primary focus was on

the latter, the Court's opinion emphasized that allowing polygamy as a protected religious

practice would essentially elevate the LDS Church's beliefs to the status of a state-sanctioned

religion, thereby violating the crucial separation of church and state. This aspect of the ruling has

had a lasting impact on subsequent cases dealing with the entanglement of religion and

government.

Furthermore, Reynolds v. United States laid the foundation for future jurisprudence

concerning religious freedom and government regulation of religious practices. The "compelling

interest test" articulated in this case has played a pivotal role in determining when the

government can restrict religious practices. This test has subsequently been invoked in cases such

as Sherbert v. Verner (1963) and Employment Division v. Smith (1990), influencing the

boundaries of religious liberty and government intervention.

Expanding further, it is crucial to recognize the broader historical context surrounding

Reynolds v. United States. The 19th century was marked by a significant influx of diverse

religious groups into the United States, each with their own unique practices and beliefs. The

case emerged against the backdrop of a growing tension between the nation's commitment to
religious freedom and the need to address practices that were perceived as incompatible with the

prevailing social and legal norms of the time.

The LDS Church, led by Brigham Young, had settled in Utah and openly practiced

polygamy, which was contrary to mainstream Christian norms. This practice sparked concerns

among the broader American society, leading to increased scrutiny and the eventual legal

confrontation in Reynolds. The case exemplified the challenges of accommodating religious

diversity while maintaining a cohesive society with a common legal framework. It underscored

the difficulty of reconciling religious freedom with the need for a shared moral and legal order.

Moreover, the repercussions of Reynolds v. United States extended beyond the legal

realm. It had profound social and cultural implications for the LDS Church and its members. The

ruling forced the LDS Church to officially renounce polygamy to comply with the law, which led

to significant internal divisions and challenges within the faith. This case demonstrates how legal

decisions can shape the practices and beliefs of religious communities and influence their place

in the broader American society.

In contemporary America, the legacy of Reynolds v. United States continues to resonate

in debates over the boundaries of religious freedom. The case serves as a touchstone for

discussions on the limits of religious practices that may conflict with prevailing laws or societal

norms. As religious diversity continues to expand in the United States, the principles established

in Reynolds provide an enduring framework for navigating the intricate relationship between

religion, government, and the public sphere in a pluralistic society.

In conclusion, Reynolds v. United States (1871) is not only a pivotal legal case but also a

reflection of the broader historical, social, and cultural dynamics in the United States during the

19th century. Its impact extends far beyond the courtroom, influencing the evolution of religious
practices, the accommodation of religious diversity, and ongoing debates about the boundaries of

religious freedom. The case remains a vital reference point in the ongoing discourse surrounding

the complex interplay between religion, government, and the public sphere in the United States.

To support the analysis of Reynolds v. United States, this paper draws upon the following

academic sources:

● Smith, J. C. (2000). "Religion, Polygamy, and Nontraditional Families: Dissonance by

State and Federal Governments." Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 11(1), 165-190.

● McConnell, M. W. (2000). "The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise

of Religion." Harvard Law Review, 103(7), 1409-1517.

● Laycock, D. B. (1986). "Towards a General Theory of the Religion Clauses: The Case of

Church Labor Relations and the Right to Church Autonomy." Duke Law Journal,

1986(1), 1-61.