Final answer:
The Supreme Court used the Establishment Clause to rule against school prayer in Engel v. Vitale and relied on the Free Exercise Clause in Employment Division v. Smith to uphold a ban on peyote. Other political institutions can limit the impact of these decisions through legislation or constitutional amendments.
Step-by-step explanation:
Engel v. Vitale (1962)
(a) In the case of Engel v. Vitale, the United States Supreme Court decision was based on the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
(b) The Court ruled that the practice of requiring students to participate in a non-denominational prayer at the start of the school day in New York State public schools was unconstitutional. The inclusion of a prayer, even though it was nondenominational and voluntary, constituted government approval of religion.
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith (1990)
(c) In Employment Division v. Smith, the Supreme Court based its decision on the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
(d) The decision stated that the government could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote, even though the use was part of a religious ritual. The Court held that an individual's religious beliefs do not excuse them from compliance with an otherwise valid law that is not specifically aimed at religious practices.
Limits on Supreme Court Decisions by Other Political Institutions
- Legislatures can pass amendments to the Constitution, which can effectively overturn a Supreme Court decision relating to constitutional interpretation.
- State or federal legislatures can also enact new legislation that addresses the issues raised by a Supreme Court decision within the boundaries set by that decision.