Citation network
Welsh Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 15, 1970
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
Welsh v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 398 U.S. 333 (1970) U.S. Supreme Court Welsh v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970) Welsh v. UnitedSearch
-
prohibition of establishment of religion, and that his conviction should be set aside on the basis of United States v. SeegerSearch
-
This case is controlled by United States v. SeegerSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
j) cannot be construed (as it was in United States v. SeegerSearch
-
the contention that Welsh's conviction should be set aside on the basis of this Court's decision in United States v. SeegerSearch
-
that have been raised, we vote to reverse this conviction because of its fundamental inconsistency with United States v. SeegerSearch
-
See United States v. SeegerSearch
-
HARLAN, concurring in the result. Candor requires me to say that I joined the Court's opinion in United States v. SeegerSearch
-
capable of bearing a contemporary construction as notions of theology and philosophy evolve. Cf. United States v. StorrsSearch
-
which this Court is freer to construe in light of evolving needs and circumstances. Cf. Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. WilsonSearch
-
U. S. 495 (1952), and my concurring opinion in Estes v. TexasSearch
-
U. S. 532 , 381 U. S. 595 -596 (1965), and my opinion concurring in the judgment in Garner v. LouisianaSearch
-
free to adopt and shape policies limited only by the most general statement of purpose. Cf., e.g., Standard Oil Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
circumstances also uncontemplated by the legislature in order to achieve the legislative policy, Holy Trinity Church v. UnitedSearch
-
that are the best guides to congressional purpose and the lengths to which Congress enacted a policy. Rosado v. WymanSearch
-
Stat. 889, without any allusion to a Supreme Being. In United States v. KautenSearch
-
The view was further elaborated in subsequent decisions of the Second Circuit, see United States ex rel. Phillips v. DownerSearch
-
Reel v. BadtSearch
-
g) was rejected by a divided Ninth Circuit in Berman v. UnitedSearch
-
n United States v. MacintoshSearch
-
of deity cannot be said to be religion in the sense of that term as it is used in the statute. It is said in State v. AmanaSearch
-
opposed to combatant military service or to both combatant and noncombatant military service. ( See United States v. BermanSearch
-
of avoiding unnecessary resolution of constitutional issues, a principle to which I fully adhere. See Ashwander v. TennesseeSearch
-
between its plainly intended purpose and the commands of the Constitution. Page 398 U. S. 355 Cf. Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 354 U. S. 298 (1957). As the Court stated in Aptheker v. SecretarySearch
-
will not carry this to the point of perverting the purpose of a statute . . .' or judicially rewriting it. Scales v. UnitedSearch
-
The issue comes sharply into focus in Mr. Justice Cardozo's statement for the Court in Moore Ice Cream Co. v. RoseSearch
-
or extend it in order to render what Congress plainly did intend, constitutional. Compare, e.g., Yu Cong Eng v. TrinidadSearch
-
U. S. 214 (1876), with Skinner v. OklahomaSearch
-
Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
and, in my view, would not offend the Free Exercise Clause, for reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in Sherbert v. VernerSearch
-
U. S. 398 , 374 U. S. 418 (1963). See Jacobson v. MassachusettsSearch
-
McGowan v. MarylandSearch
-
Hamilton v. BoardSearch
-
Reynolds v. UnitedSearch
-
in my view, compatible with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. See my separate opinion in Walz v. TaxSearch
-
Page 398 U. S. 357 Engel v. VitaleSearch
-
Fowler v. RhodeSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial