Answer
Both **Wisconsin v. Yoder** and **Reynolds v. United States** deal with the **Free Exercise Clause** of the First Amendment, which protects religious freedom.
- **Wisconsin v. Yoder** allowed the Amish to keep their children out of high school because their religious beliefs didn't harm public interests.
- **Reynolds v. United States** ruled that practicing polygamy, even for religious reasons, was not allowed because it went against federal laws and public morals.
So, the main difference is that **Yoder** protected religious practices that didn't conflict with the state's laws, while **Reynolds** restricted religious practices that were illegal and against societal norms.
Solution
### 1. **Core Concept Addressed in Both Cases**
Both **Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)** and **Reynolds v. United States (1879)** center on the **Free Exercise Clause** of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects individuals' rights to practice their religion freely. Specifically, these cases explore the balance between **religious freedom** and **state authority** to enforce laws that may restrict certain religious practices.
- **Wisconsin v. Yoder** dealt with the Amish community's objection to mandatory state education beyond the eighth grade, arguing that high school education was contrary to their religious beliefs.
- **Reynolds v. United States** involved a member of the Mormon Church who was prosecuted for practicing polygamy, which was illegal under federal law, despite its religious significance to him.
### 2. **Reasons for Different Outcomes**
The divergent outcomes of these cases stem from how the Supreme Court interpreted the relationship between religious practices and state interests, particularly focusing on whether the challenged religious practices infringed upon **public morals**, **safety**, or **general welfare**.
- **Reynolds v. United States (1879):**
- **Decision:** The Supreme Court upheld the federal anti-polygamy laws, ruling that religious duty was not a defense to a criminal indictment.
- **Rationale:** The Court distinguished between **beliefs** and **practices**, asserting that while individuals are free to believe in whatever manner they choose, they are not free to engage in practices that are deemed criminal. Polygamy was seen as violating societal norms and the legal framework governing marriage.
- **Impact:** This case established that certain religious practices could be restricted if they contravened established laws and public policy, even if they were deeply rooted in religious beliefs.
- **Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972):**
- **Decision:** The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Amish families, allowing them to withdraw their children from public high schools after the eighth grade.
- **Rationale:** The Court recognized that the state's interest in compulsory education was not compelling enough to override the Amish community's rights to freely exercise their religion. It considered factors such as the minimal harm to the children's future opportunities and the value of religious education to the Amish way of life.
- **Impact:** This case demonstrated a willingness of the Court to protect religious practices when they do not pose significant harm to public interests, emphasizing a more nuanced approach to balancing religious freedom with state regulations.
### **Summary**
While both cases address the tension between religious freedom and state regulation, **Reynolds v. United States** resulted in upholding state laws over religious practices deemed harmful or contrary to public policy. In contrast, **Wisconsin v. Yoder** favored religious autonomy when the practices in question did not significantly impinge upon the state's interests or societal welfare. The differing outcomes highlight the Court's role in assessing the specific circumstances and impacts of religious practices when determining the extent to which religious freedom is protected under the Constitution.
Reviewed and approved by the UpStudy tutoring team
Explain
Simplify this solution
