The Court reasoned, “Congress cannot pass a law for the government of the Territories which shall prohibit the free exercise of religion.
Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site. Here’s how you know. Whereupon the United States challenged the said Brown for favor, which challenge was sustained by the court, and the defendant excepted. “Can a man excuse his [illegal] practices…because of his religious belief? #620 Arlington, VA 22201The Court upheld his conviction and Congress’s power to prohibit polygamy. Reynolds v. United States (1879) Summary. This was in part, the Court held, because marriage was a “most important” feature of social life: “Upon it [marriage] society may be said to be built. The Court held that it would not overturn a case based on the legality of challenges to dismissed jurors.Every person having a husband or wife living, who marries another, whether married or single, in a Territory, or other place over which the United States have exclusive jurisdiction, is guilty of bigamy, and shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500, and by imprisonment for a term of not more than five years.Reynolds had argued that the jury had been improperly instructed by the judge when he told them that they "should consider what are to be the consequences to the innocent victims of this delusion".
Aud. Richardson v. Stewart, 2 Serg. The Court held that Reynolds had freely admitted that he was a bigamist. The first amendment to the Constitution expressly forbids such legislation….Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order.” In other words, while Congress could not outlaw a belief in the correctness of polygamy, it could outlaw the practice of it. The court held that Reynolds had every opportunity under oath to reveal the whereabouts of Schofield. Docket No. Op.
The Court ruled unanimously that a law banning polygamy was constitutional, and did not infringe upon individuals’ First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.
Eventually his case came before the Supreme Court.In 1890, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints officially rejected polygamy and issued a statement dissolving “any marriages forbidden by the law of the land.”https://billofrightsinstitute.org/educate/educator-resources/lessons-plans/landmark-supreme-court-cases-elessons/reynolds-v-united-states-1878/Finally, the Court concluded that people cannot excuse themselves from the law because of their religion. George Reynolds was a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, charged with bigamy under the Morrill A Reynolds v. United States.
No proof was offered as to the genuineness of the paper or its origin, nor did the witness testify to its contents of his own knowledge.
He was convicted. The Court held that evidence Amelia Jane Schofield, Reynold's second wife, gave during an earlier trial of Reynolds for the same offense but under a different indictment was admissible. ... Reynolds v. United States - Brief (Merits) Docket number: No. Start studying AP Gov Court Cases to Know. Reynolds v. US (1879) ... a United States Supreme Court decision concerning the question of whether the defendant possessed a First Amendment right to free speech against the draft during World War I. We’ve got you covered with The Ultimate Student Test Prep so you can prepare for the AP ® US Government and Politics Exam from home, now! The trial court refused this request and instructed the jury that if they found that Reynolds, under religious influence, "deliberately married a second time, having a first wife living, the want of consciousness of evil intent—the want of understanding on his part that he was committing crime—did not excuse him, but the law inexorably, in such cases, implies criminal intent. "The Court considered whether Reynolds could use religious belief or duty as a defense.
& R. (Pa.) 84; Chess v. Chess, 17 id. Here’s how you know. Reynolds, 98 U.S. at 166.