The Supreme Court recently announced it will hear St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, a case centered on whether a Catholic preschool may exclude LGBTQ children and children of LGBTQ parents from a universal preschool program. While the school asked the court to reconsider the 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith, the justices declined to take up that specific question.
This decision marks another instance where the court has avoided overturning the precedent established in Smith. This 1990 ruling originally determined that the First Amendment does not provide religious exemptions from neutral, generally applicable laws. Critics argue this decision restricts religious practice, while the court continues to navigate its implications through narrower questions.
Legal experts note that while some justices have signaled a desire to revisit Smith, a clear path forward for replacing the precedent remains elusive. Instead of overturning the case, the court has consistently limited its impact by tightening definitions of what constitutes a neutral and generally applicable law. Decisions like Tandon v. Newsom and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia have made it increasingly difficult for state regulations to meet that threshold.
For now, Smith remains active law. The court appears comfortable with the current approach, which involves applying the precedent while chipping away at its reach through targeted rulings. As legal battles persist, the long-term status of this foundational free exercise decision remains one of the most significant open questions in American constitutional law.