CHURCH OF THE LUKUMI BABALU AYE V. CITY OF HIALEAH (1993)

In an era where Supreme Court decisions are highly polarized, in both 5–4 votes cast and in the eyes of the American electorate writ large, one may forget that the members of our nation’s highest court do at times find unanimous consensus. One such decision was Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah. The Supreme Court, led, ironically, by the Court’s perennial swing vote, Justice Anthony Kennedy, held that a law targeting a particular religion must satisfy “strict scrutiny” to pass constitutional muster. In other words, any law of this nature must be narrowly tailored and serve a compelling government interest to be constitutionally valid. The Court found that an ordinance by the city of Hialeah banning religious animal sacrifice did not meet those requirements, violating the First Amendment’s free exercise clause.

The juxtaposition of the Court’s holdings in Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye and the recent Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018) highlights the complexity of the ACLU’s fight for civil rights and religious freedom. In Masterpiece Cakeshop, the Supreme Court cited Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye in its decision, holding that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, like the City of Hialeah, was unconstitutionally hostile toward a baker who refused to furnish a same-sex couple with a wedding cake based on his religious beliefs. Nevertheless, the Court implied that the decision was narrow, focusing on what they deemed to be the antireligious bias of some of the commissioners. The Court affirmed the “dignity” of gay people and couples and acknowledged their entitlement to protection against discrimination.