Sherbert v. Verner
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
The other opinions applied Sherbert positively, reported Smith's treatment as history, rejected adverse arguments, or used nearby treatment language for other authorities. Where one opinion was flagged more than once or appears in duplicate copies, each flag was read and counted separately.
2,648 later cases cite Sherbert v. Verner; 88 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Sherbert v. Verner?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Limited
-
The Supreme Court confined Sherbert's compelling-interest test outside unemployment-compensation programs and declined to extend it to exemptions from generally applicable criminal laws.
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith · Supreme Court of the United States · filed
Even if we were inclined to breathe into Sherbert some life beyond the unemployment compensation field, we would not apply it to require exemptions from a generally applicable criminal law. The Sherbert test, it must be recalled, was developed in a context that lent itself to individualized governmental assessment of the reasons for the relevant conduct.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener → -
The Alaska Supreme Court declined to extend Sherbert's individualized-assessment strict-scrutiny framework to a discretionary decision denying payment for a particular habilitation program.
Shagalow v. State, Department of Human Services · Supreme Court of Alaska · filed
We recognize that the strict scrutiny analysis in the unemployment line of cases was not expressly overruled by Smith, and that federal circuit courts have used an individualized assessment approach as an exception to Smith. See, e.g., Axson-Flynn v. Johnson, 356 F.3d 1277, 1297-99 (10th Cir.2004); Swanson v. Guthrie Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 1-L, 135 F.3d 694 (10th Cir.1998). We do not disagree with such applications of an individual assessment, but we decline appellant’s invitation to extend it to her situation. See Smith, 494 U.S. at 883, 110 S.Ct. at 1602 (“We have never invalidated any governmental action on the basis of the Sherbert test except the denial of unemployment compensation.”). Instead, we continue to apply the test established in Smith.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Sherbert v. Verner and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace