Reply #290: Neither of these cases interfere with the practice of religion.

[Wizard777]

Oregon v Smith is about the denial of unemployment benefits. And Lying v. NICA was about indians using land they don't own for religious purposes. But when it comes to the religious uses of peyote, marijuana, and other drugs that are illegal. SCOTUS consistently sides with the religion. The practitioners cannot be incarcerated for practicing their religion. But that is all that covers. Just incarceration. Your employer can fire you for the drug use and you can be denied unemployment benefits. These do not interfere with the practice of your religion. Something else may come into play here. That's the religious freedom restoration act. That basically states that the government cannot place a burden upon religion. I think that was passed as a compensation for SCOTUS over turning the sherbert test.

Also then Scalia was concerned with preventing anarchy. But more recently I think the focus of the court will shift to preventing a communist police state.