Five Justices emphatically disagreed which have Smith’s reinterpretation of one’s Totally free Do it Term

Justice O’Connor blogged that the the newest training “drastically depart[ed] off really-compensated First Modification jurisprudence” and you will was “in conflict with our Nation’s fundamental commitment to individual spiritual versatility

” 494 U. S., at the 891 (view concurring during the judgment). Justices Brennan, Marshall, and Blackmun protested that the majority had “mischaracteriz[ed]” and you can “discard[ed]” the Court’s free-do it jurisprudence coming to “perfunctorily write off[ing]” the brand new “compensated and inviolate idea” you to definitely county statutes burdening spiritual independence may remain only if “justified of the a persuasive interest that can’t getting made by reduced limiting means.” Id., from the 907–908 (Blackmun, J., inserted by the Brennan and you will Marshall, JJ., dissenting).

Smith’s feeling try quickly thought, and you can Congress try overloaded that have records of decision’s effects. As a result, it tried to fix the newest Sherbert decide to try. In the home, then-Affiliate Charles Schumer put a bill you to definitely made a form of one test applicable to all the procedures pulled by the Government and/or Claims. H. R. 1308, 103d Cong., initial Sess. (1993). So it statement, and therefore ultimately became the brand new Spiritual Freedom Restoration Work (RFRA), introduced at home without dissent, try accepted throughout the Senate by the a ballot of 97 so you’re able to step 3, and you will was eagerly signed to the laws by the Chairman Clinton. 139 Cong. Rec. 27239–27341 (1993) (Household voice vote); id., within 26416 (Senate choose); Responses on Finalizing the fresh new Spiritual Versatility Maintenance Act out of 1993, 30 Each week Compensation. out of Pres. Doctor. 2377 (1993). And if it Court later on stored inside City of Boerne, 521 U.S. 507, you to Congress lacked the benefit according to the 14th Amendment to demand these regulations on the Says, Congress responded of the enacting new Religious Property Fool around with and you will Institutionalized People Work (RLUIPA) less than their expenses stamina as well as ability to regulate road business. Select 114Stat. 803. Lead about Senate from the Sen. Orrin Hatch and you may cosponsored from the Sen. Edward Kennedy, RLUIPA implemented a comparable regulations as RFRA towards residential property explore and you may prison statutes. S. 2869, 106th Cong., 2d Sess. (2000); 42 U. S. C. §2000cc et seq; 146 Cong . Rec. 16698 (2000). RLUIPA enacted both Houses off Congress rather than just one negative vote and you may, including RFRA, is actually closed by the Chairman Clinton. Id., within 16703, 16623; Report with the Signing the brand new Spiritual Home Have fun with and you may Institutionalized People Act off 2000, thirty six Weekly Comp. regarding Pres. Doctor. 2168 (2000).

RFRA and RLUIPA has actually restored an element of the shelter you to definitely Smith withdrew, but they are both minimal for the range and certainly will become poor otherwise repealed by Congress anytime. He is zero solution to an actual interpretation of the 100 % free Do so Clause.

S. ___, ___–___ (2019) (slip op

One endeavor need certainly to begin with the constitutional text. During the Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, step one Grain. 304, 338–339 (1816), Justice Tale put on the at the rear of concept: “In case your text message feel clear and you can line of, no maximum up on their basic and obvious import should really be admitted, except if the brand new inference become amazing.” And even though we have a thick looks regarding precedent concerning your meaning of really conditions of your Structure, our very own viewpoints continue steadily to esteem the brand new primacy of your own Constitution’s text message. Select, elizabeth.grams., Chiafalo v. Washington, 591 You. S. ___, ___–___ (2020) (sneak op., in the 9–13) (starting with the words from Ways. II, §step 1, before given historic behavior); Knick v. Township out of Scott, 588 U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (sneak op., at 6) (birth studies into the text of your own Takings Term); Play v. All of us, 587 You. , in the step three–4) (starting with the words of your Fifth Modification before turning to background and you may precedent); Town of Boerne, 521 You. S., at the 519 (“In determining the fresh depth out-of §5’s administration power, we begin with the text”).