Reynolds v. United States
E5191
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Reynolds v. United States canonical | 7 |
| George Reynolds v. United States | 1 |
| George Reynolds was prosecuted for bigamy under federal law in the Utah Territory | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T61135 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Reynolds v. United States Context triple: [Free Exercise Clause, interpretedInCase, Reynolds v. United States]
-
A.
United States v. Nixon
United States v. Nixon was a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited presidential privilege and compelled President Richard Nixon to release the Watergate tapes, reinforcing the principle that not even the president is above the law.
-
B.
Wickard v. Filburn
Wickard v. Filburn is a landmark 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that dramatically expanded federal regulatory power by holding that even purely local, non-commercial activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause if it had a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
-
C.
Helvering v. Davis
Helvering v. Davis is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the Social Security Act and broadly affirmed federal power to tax and spend for the general welfare.
-
D.
Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade was a landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that recognized a constitutional right to abortion, profoundly shaping American law and politics until it was overturned in 2022.
-
E.
Marbury v. Madison
Marbury v. Madison is the landmark 1803 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review, empowering federal courts to strike down laws that violate the Constitution.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Reynolds v. United States Target entity description: Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
A.
United States v. Nixon
United States v. Nixon was a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited presidential privilege and compelled President Richard Nixon to release the Watergate tapes, reinforcing the principle that not even the president is above the law.
-
B.
Wickard v. Filburn
Wickard v. Filburn is a landmark 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that dramatically expanded federal regulatory power by holding that even purely local, non-commercial activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause if it had a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
-
C.
McCulloch v. Maryland
McCulloch v. Maryland is an 1819 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed federal supremacy over the states and upheld the implied powers of Congress under the Constitution.
-
D.
Hines v. Davidowitz
Hines v. Davidowitz is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal law preempts conflicting state alien-registration laws under the Supremacy Clause.
-
E.
Helvering v. Davis
Helvering v. Davis is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the Social Security Act and broadly affirmed federal power to tax and spend for the general welfare.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
First Amendment case
ⓘ
U.S. Supreme Court case ⓘ free exercise of religion case ⓘ legal case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ religion clauses of the First Amendment ⓘ |
| category |
1879 in United States case law
ⓘ
U.S. Supreme Court cases on freedom of religion ⓘ United States polygamy case law ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtDecision |
Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite
ⓘ
surface form:
Morrison R. Waite
|
| citation | 98 U.S. 145 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Free Exercise Clause ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1879-01-06 ⓘ |
| decisionType | unanimous decision ⓘ |
| factPattern |
Reynolds v. United States
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
George Reynolds was prosecuted for bigamy under federal law in the Utah Territory
|
| fullCaseName |
Reynolds v. United States
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
George Reynolds v. United States
|
| holding |
Laws banning polygamy do not violate the Free Exercise Clause
ⓘ
Religious duty is not a defense to a criminal indictment ⓘ The Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws ⓘ The Free Exercise Clause protects religious belief but not all religiously motivated conduct ⓘ |
| impact |
established the belief–action distinction in Free Exercise analysis
ⓘ
upheld federal power to criminalize polygamy in U.S. territories ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States government
ⓘ
surface form:
United States federal government
|
| legalIssue |
constitutionality of criminal bans on polygamy
ⓘ
scope of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment ⓘ |
| opinionAuthor | Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite ⓘ |
| originatingJurisdiction |
Utah
ⓘ
surface form:
Territory of Utah
|
| page | 145 ⓘ |
| partyAffiliationOfDefendant | member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ⓘ |
| petitioner | George Reynolds ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
distinction between religious belief and religiously motivated conduct
ⓘ
later Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence ⓘ |
| reasoning |
Allowing religious belief to excuse criminal acts would make religious doctrine superior to the law of the land
ⓘ
Government may regulate actions that are in violation of social duties or subversive of good order ⓘ |
| respondent |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| result | conviction of George Reynolds for bigamy affirmed ⓘ |
| statuteInvolved | Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
bigamy
ⓘ
polygamy ⓘ religious liberty ⓘ |
| volume | 98 U.S. ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1879 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Reynolds v. United States Description of subject: Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
Referenced by (9)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.