Final answer:
The government overruled the Free Exercise of Religion Clause in the case of Employment Division v. Smith (1990) by ruling that neutral laws of general applicability do not violate the clause.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the 1990 case Employment Division v. Smith, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that neutral laws of general applicability do not infringe upon the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, even if they incidentally burden religious practices. The case involved two members of the Native American Church, Alfred Smith and Galen Black, who were denied unemployment benefits after being fired for using peyote, a hallucinogenic substance, in a religious ceremony.
The Court's decision marked a departure from previous interpretations of the Free Exercise Clause, limiting the protection afforded to religious practices. The ruling held that individuals are not entitled to exemptions from laws that apply uniformly to the general population, even if such laws incidentally impact their religious beliefs, thus establishing a precedent for balancing religious freedom against broader legal regulations.