Report
mahmoud-v-taylor-pet
60 authorities checked
How this report was built
AI inference calls
0
Citations parsed
60
Sources queried
3
Cornell LII, CourtListener, State code databases
Source texts retrieved
41
Quotes checked
201
143 matched in source text
Verification runs deterministically against authoritative public databases. Your brief is not sent to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or any other third-party model.
Click any citation below to see how we verified it, the matched source, and a per-quote breakdown.
§Authorities
|
1 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 600 U.S. 570 (2023) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “303 Creative LLC v. Elenis”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“the First Amendment does not tolerate”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“about a question of political and religious significance.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
2 Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Bostock v. Clayton County”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“preserving the promise of the free exercise of religion enshrined in our Constitution.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
3 Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U.S. 589 (1988) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Bowen v. Kendrick”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“issue[s]as sensitive and important as [child] sexuality”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“fundamental elements of religious doctrine.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
4 Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Brown v. Board of Education”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“Free Public Schools.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
5 Brown v. Entertainment Merchs. Ass'n, 564 U.S. 786 (2011) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
2 of 3 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“direct causal link”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“make a predictive judgment that such a link exists.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“dismissive of [their] religious beliefs.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
6 Brown v. Hot, Sexy and Safer Prods., Inc., 68 F.3d 525 (1st Cir. 1995) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Ronald C. Brown v. Hot, Sexy and Safer Productions, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“had a male minor lick an oversized condom with her”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“encouraged a male minor to display his 'orgasm face' with her for the camera”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
7 Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. 767 (2022) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Carson v. Makin”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
8 Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
9 of 12 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“many ways of demonstrating that the object or purpose”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the suppression of religion or religious conduct.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[f]acial neutrality is not determinative.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the effect,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“net result”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“target[ed] religious conduct for distinctive treatment”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“the effect,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“net result”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“religious gerrymander.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“social stigma”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“who believe that the books represent them.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“[A]law cannot be regarded as protecting an interest 'of the highest order' * * * when it leaves appreciable damage to that supposedly vital interest unprohibited.”
The brief's quote matches 96% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …ded as protecting an interest of the highest order * * * whe…
opinion: …ded as protecting an interest `of the highest order * * * whe…
brief: … interest of the highest order * * * when it leaves appreciable da…
opinion: … interest of the highest order... when it leaves appreciable da…
9 Department of Com. v. New York, 588 U.S. 752 (2019) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Department of Commerce v. New York”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“not required to exhibit a naiveté from which ordinary citizens are free.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
10 Employment Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
0 of 3 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. Smith”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“When possible, schools should try”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“have the right to ask”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“it may be feasible to accommodate”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
11 Espinoza v. Montana Dep't of Revenue, 591 U.S. 464 (2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 5 of 5 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Espinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“long recognized the rights of parents to direct 'the religious upbringing' of their children.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[d]rawing on”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“The Free Exercise Clause draws upon a history that places great value upon the freedom of parents to teach their children the tenets of their faith.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“enduring American tradition”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“inevitably deters or discourages the exercise of First Amendment rights,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
12 Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. San Jose Unified Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 82 F.4th 664 (9th Cir. 2023) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. San Jose Unified School District Board of Educatio”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“has failed to offer any showing that it has even considered less restrictive measures than those implemented here.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
13 Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, 593 U.S. 522 (2021) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
15 of 19 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Fulton v. Philadelphia”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“formal mechanism for granting exceptions”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“renders a policy not generally applicable.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“a mechanism for individualized exemptions,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“'invite[s]' the government to decide which reasons for not complying with the policy are worthy of solicitude.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“[i]f a parent chooses to opt out, a teacher can find a substitute text for that student that * * * aligns with curriculum.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“schools already had granted accommodation requests.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“mechanism for individualized exemptions,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“after the 2022-2023 school year ended.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“invite[s]”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“to decide which reasons”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“are worthy of solicitude.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“Government fails to act neutrally when it proceeds in a manner intolerant of religious beliefs or restricts practices because of their religious nature.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the ordinary meaning”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the First Amendment demands a more precise analysis.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the asserted harm of granting specific exemptions to particular religious claimants.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“this description * * * corresponds closely with the understanding of the scope of the free-exercise right at the time of the First Amendment's adoption”
The brief's quote matches 85% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …this description * * * corresponds closely with the …
opinion: … the earlier decisions corresponds closely with the …
“equal treatment”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“an exception for [their] religious exercise.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“[S]o long as the government can achieve its interests in a manner that does not burden religion, it must do so.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
14 Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 (2006) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União Do Vegetal”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“classic rejoinder of bureaucrats throughout history: If I make an exception for you, I'll have to make one for everybody, so no exceptions.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
15 Holt v. Hobbs, 574 U.S. 352 (2015) brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
2 of 6 located
Brief-quality observations
- A case named 'Gregory Houston Holt, aka Abdul Maalik Muhammad v. Ray Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction' exists in CourtListener at [{'volume': '135', 'reporter': 'S. Ct.', 'page': '853'}, {'volume': '190', 'reporter': 'L. Ed. 2d', 'page': '747'}, {'volume': '2015', 'reporter': 'U.S. LEXIS', 'page': '626'}, {'volume': '25', 'reporter': 'Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S', 'page': '43'}, {'volume': '83', 'reporter': 'U.S.L.W.', 'page': '4065'}, {'volume': '93', 'reporter': 'A.L.R. Fed. 2d', 'page': '777'}] (scotus, 2015), but the brief's citation does not match.
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The brief's reporter triple is independently confirmed by leagle.com's volume index, and CourtListener's docket index identifies the same case.
Quotes attributed to this authority
“one instance”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“dozens of students”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“[W]hen so many [others] offer an accommodation, a [school district] must, at a minimum, offer persuasive reasons why it believes that it must take a different course, and the [Board] failed to make that showing here.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“safe and conducive”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“stigma and isolation.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“must take a different course”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
16 Kennedy v. Bremerton Sch. Dist., 597 U.S. 507 (2022) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
1 of 2 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“prov[e] a free exercise violation in various ways.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“actual coercion”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
17 Mahanoy Area Sch. Dist. v. B.L., 594 U.S. 180 (2021) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Mahanoy Area School Dist. v. B. L”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“special interest in regulating speech”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
18 Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado C.R. Comm'n, 584 U.S. 617 (2018) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
6 of 12 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm'n”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“inform[ed] * * * when [the] inclusive books are read.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“[f]or example, family life isn't taught until fifth grade, but a second grade book uses terminology such as cisgender or transgender.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“Only by adjusting the dials just right * * * can you engineer”
The brief's quote matches 62% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …adjusting the dials just right * * * can you engineer…
opinion: …adjusting the dials just right-fine-tuning the level of generality up or …
“the historical background of the decision under challenge, the specific series of events leading to the enactment or official policy in question, and the legislative or administrative history, including contemporaneous statements made by members”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[O]fficial expressions of hostility to religion,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“not disavowed”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“at any point in the proceedings,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“inconsistent with what the Free Exercise Clause requires.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“dehumanizing form of erasure.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“[y]es, ignorance and hate does exist in our community.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“neutral and respectful consideration.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“'set aside' * * * without further inquiry”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
19 42, 43 McDaniel v. Paty, 435 U.S. 618 (1978) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “McDaniel v. Paty”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
20 Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
4 of 5 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Meyer v. Nebraska”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“ideal citizen[]”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“ideas * * * upon which our institutions rest.”
The brief's quote matches 75% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …ideas * * * upon which our institutions r…
opinion: … from those upon which our institutions r…
“establish a home and bring up children”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“control [their] education,”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“without doing violence to both letter and spirit of the Constitution.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
21 Meyer v. State, 187 N.W. 100 (Neb. 1922) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Meyer v. State”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“The text book used for such teaching was a book of biblical stories.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“in teaching the German language in this book he was giving religious instruction.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
22 Minersville Sch. Dist. v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Minersville School District v. Gobitis”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“the court-room is not the arena for debating issues of educational policy.”
Found — minor punctuation or spacing differences.
23 Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
2 of 3 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Obergefell v. Hodges”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“religious * * * persons”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“decent and honorable”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
24 Our Lady of Guadalupe Sch. v. Morrisey-Berru, 591 U.S. 732 (2020) brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· opinion text unavailable
Brief-quality observations
- A case named 'Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru' exists in CourtListener at 140 S. Ct. 2049, 207 L. Ed. 2d 870 (scotus, 2020). The brief cites it as 591 U.S. 732 — the brief's citation does not match the real instrument.
Why we flagged this
- We couldn't independently verify this citation against our public sources.
- We couldn't retrieve the source text from any of our public sources.
Why we couldn't check the quotes
We couldn't retrieve any opinion text for this citation from our public sources. The case may only be available on a paid service like Westlaw or Lexis. Without the text, we can't check whether the brief's quotes appear in the opinion.
Quotes attributed to this authority
These quotes have not been verified because the opinion text wasn't available.
central importance
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
educating the young in the faith
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
25 Pierce v. Society of Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus & Mary, 268 U.S. 510 (1925) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 5 of 5 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Pierce v. Society of Sisters”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“entirely plain”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the right of parents to choose”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“appropriate mental and religious training”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
26 Ramirez v. Collier, 595 U.S. 411 (2022) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 4 of 4 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Ramirez v. Collier”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“[d]espite this long history”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“Often, the Court also examines history and contemporary state practice to inform the inquiries”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“least restrictive”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“basis for deference.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
27 Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 592 U.S. 14 (2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“categorizations.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
28 Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Roper v. Simmons”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“pressures, including peer pressure.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
29 Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
5 of 6 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Sherbert v. Verner”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“accept available suitable work”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“work on Saturday”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“force[d] * * * to choose”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“substantial infringement”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“First Amendment right.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“inevitably deterred or discouraged the exercise of First Amendment rights.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
30 Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., 600 U.S. 181 (2023) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 5 of 5 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“be subjected to meaningful judicial review,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“how is a court to know when”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“been reached?”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“There is no particular point”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“fail[s]to articulate a meaningful connection between the means [it] employ[s]and the goal[] [it] pursue[s].”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
31 Tandon v. Newsom, 593 U.S. 61 (2021) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
3 of 5 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Tandon v. Newsom”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“any comparable secular activity more favorably than religious exercise.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“interest that justifies the regulation at issue.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[i]t is no answer that [the government] treats some comparable secular [opt-out requests] as poorly as or even less favorably than the religious [opt-outs] at issue.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“LGBTQ-inclus[ivity]”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“not neutral * * * and therefore trigger[s]strict scrutiny under the Free Exercise Clause.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
32 Thomas v. Review Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707 (1981) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
33 Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, 582 U.S. 449 (2017) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 3 of 3 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“declining to extend”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“not prohibit the Church from engaging in any religious conduct or otherwise exercising its religious rights.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
34 United States v. Stanchich, 550 F.2d 1294 (2d Cir. 1977) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “United States v. Eric Stanchich”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
35 West Va. State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
23 of 27 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“spirit of Americanism,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“instruction in history”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“become unwilling converts”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“forgo any contrary convictions.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“invades the sphere of intellect and spirit”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“from all official control.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“compelling little children to participate in a ceremony which ends in nothing for them but a fear of spiritual condemnation”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“fails to accord full scope to the freedom of religion secured * * * by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.”
The brief's quote matches 95% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …e freedom of religion secured * * * by the first and fourteenth a…
opinion: …e freedom of religion secured to the appellees by the first and fourteenth a…
“freedom to believe [and] freedom to worship one's Maker according to the dictates of one's conscience”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“National unity [a]s the basis of National security.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“spiritually diverse”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“things that do not matter much,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“functions of educational officers * * * would in effect make [it] the school board for the country.”
The brief's quote matches 95% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …tions of educational officers * * * would in effect make the scho…
opinion: …tions of educational officers in states, counties and school districts were such that to interfere with their authority would in effect make the scho…
brief: …ers * * * would in effect make the school board for the coun…
opinion: …ers * * * would in effect make us the school board for the coun…
“[d]isrupt”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“either/or thinking.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“attitude of mind”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[M]odest estimates”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“such specialties as public education”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“modest estimates”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“such specialties as public education”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“Boards of education not excepted”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the limits of the Bill of Rights.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[s]truggles to coerce uniformity of sentiment in support of some end thought essential to [the] time.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“As governmental pressure toward unity becomes greater, so strife becomes more bitter as to whose unity it shall be.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
36 33-34, 46, 50, 51 Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
27 of 41 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Wisconsin v. Yoder”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“substantially interfering with the right of parents to direct the religious upbringing of their children.”
The brief's quote matches 96% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …ntially interfering with the right of parents to direct the reli…
opinion: …ntially interfering with the religious development of the amish child and his integration into the way of life of the amish faith community at the crucial adolescent stage of development, contravenes the basic religious tenets and practice of the amish faith, both as to the parent and the child. the impact of the compulsory-attendance law on respondents practice of the amish religion is not only severe, but inescapable, for the wisconsin law affirmatively compels them, under threat of criminal sanction, to perform acts undeniably at odds with fundamental tenets of their religious beliefs. see braunfeld v. brown, 366 u. s. 599, 605(1961). nor is the impact of the compulsory-attendance law confined to grave interference with important amish religious tenets from a subjective point of view. it carries with it precisely the kind of objective danger to the free exercise of religion that the first amendment was designed to prevent. as the record shows, compulsory school attendance to age 16 for amish children carries with it a very real threat of undermining the amish community and religious practice as they exist today; they must either abandon belief and be assimilated into society at large, or be forced to migrate to some other and more tolerant region. 9 *219 in sum, the unchallenged testimony of acknowledged experts in education and religious history, almost 300 years of consistent practice, and strong evidence of a sustained faith pervading and regulating respondents entire mode of life support the claim that enforcement of the states requirement of compulsory formal education after the eighth grade would gravely endanger if not destroy the free exercise of respondents religious beliefs. ill neither the findings of the trial court nor the amish claims as to the nature of their faith are challenged in this court by the state of wisconsin. its position is that the states interest in universal compulsory formal secondary education to age 16 is so great that it is paramount to the undisputed claims of respondents that their mode of preparing their youth for amish life, after the traditional elementary education, is an essential part of their religious belief and practice. nor does the state undertake to meet the claim that the amish mode of life and education is inseparable from and a part of the basic tenets of their religion-indeed, as much a part of their religious belief and practices as baptism, the confessional, or a sabbath may be for others. wisconsin concedes that under the religion clauses religious beliefs are absolutely free from the states control, but it argues that actions, even though religiously grounded, are outside the protection of the first amendment. 10 but our decisions have rejected the idea that religiously grounded conduct is always outside the protection of the free exercise clause. it is true that activities of individuals, even when religiously based, are often subject to regulation by the states in the exercise of their undoubted power to promote the health, safety, and general welfare, or the federal government in the exercise of its delegated powers. see, e. g., gillette v. united states, 401 u. s. 437(1971); braunjeld v. brown, 366 u. s. 599(1961); prince v. massachusetts, 321 u. s. 158(1944); reynolds v. united states, 98 u. s. 145(1879). but to agree that religiously grounded conduct must often be subject to the broad police power of the state is not to deny that there are areas of conduct protected by the free exercise clause of the first amendment and thus beyond the power of the state to control, even under regulations of general applicability. e. g., sherbert v. verner, 374 u. s. 398(1963); murdock v. pennsylvania, 319 u. s. 105(1943); cantwell v. connecticut, 310 u. s. 296, 303-304(1940). this case, therefore, does not become easier because respondents were convicted for their actions in refusing to send their children to the public high school; in this context belief and action cannot be neatly confined in logic-tight compartments. cf. lemon v. kurtzman, 403 u. s., at 612. nor can this case be disposed of on the grounds that wisconsins requirement for school attendance to age 16 applies uniformly to all citizens of the state and does not, on its face, discriminate against religions or a particular religion, or that it is motivated by legitimate secular concerns. a regulation neutral on its face may, in its application, nonetheless offend the constitutional requirement for governmental neutrality if it unduly burdens the free exercise of religion. sherbert v. verner, supra; cf. walz v. tax commission, 397 u. s. 664(1970). the court must not ignore the danger that an exception from a general obligation of citizenship on religious grounds may run afoul of the establishment clause, but that danger cannot be allowed to prevent any exception no matter how vital it may be to the protection of values promoted by the right of free exercise. by preserving doctrinal flexibility and recognizing the need for a sensible and realistic application of the religion clauses we have been able to chart a course that preserved the autonomy and freedom of religious bodies while avoiding any semblance of established religion. this is a tight rope and one we have successfully traversed. walz v. tax commission, supra, at 672. we turn, then, to the states broader contention that its interest in its system of compulsory education is so compelling that even the established religious practices of the amish must give way. where fundamental claims of religious freedom are at stake, however, we cannot accept such a sweeping claim; despite its admitted validity in the generality of cases, we must searchingly examine the interests that the state seeks to promote by its requirement for compulsory education to age 16, and the impediment to those objectives that would flow from recognizing the claimed amish exemption. see, e. g., sherbert v. verner, supra; martin v. city of struthers, 319 u. s. 141(1943); schneider v. state, 308 u. s. 147(1939). the state advances two primary arguments in support of its system of compulsory education. it notes, as thomas jefferson pointed out early in our history, that some degree of education is necessary to prepare citizens to participate effectively and intelligently in our open political system if we are to preserve freedom and independence. further, education prepares individuals to be self-reliant and self-sufficient participants in society. we accept these propositions. *222 however, the evidence adduced by the amish in this case is persuasively to the effect that an additional one or two years of formal high school for amish children in place of their long-established program of informal vocational education would do little to serve those interests. respondents experts testified at trial, without challenge, that the value of all education must be assessed in terms of its capacity to prepare the child for life. it is one thing to say that compulsory education for a year or two beyond the eighth grade may be necessary when its goal is the preparation of the child for life in modern society as the majority live, but it is quite another if the goal of education be viewed as the preparation of the child for life in the separated agrarian community that is the keystone of the amish faith. see meyer v. nebraska, 262 u. s., at 400. the state attacks respondents position as one fostering ignorance from which the child must be protected by the state. no one can question the states duty to protect children from ignorance but this argument does not square with the facts disclosed in the record. whatever their idiosyncrasies as seen by the majority, this record strongly shows that the amish community has been a highly successful social unit within our society, even if apart from the conventional mainstream. its members are productive and very law-abiding members of society; they reject public welfare in any of its usual modern forms. the congress itself recognized their self-sufficiency by authorizing exemption of such groups as the amish from the obligation to pay social security taxes. 11 *223 it is neither fair nor correct to suggest that the amish are opposed to education beyond the eighth grade level. what this record shows is that they are opposed to conventional formal education of the type provided by a certified high school because it comes at the childs crucial adolescent period of religious development. dr. donald erickson, for example, testified that their system of learning-by-doing was an ideal system of education in terms of preparing amish children for life as adults in the amish community, and that i would be inclined to say they do a better job in this than most of the rest of us do. as he put it, these people arent purporting to be learned people, and it seems to me the self-sufficiency of the community is the best evidence i can point to- whatever is being done seems to function well. 12 we must not forget that in the middle ages important values of the civilization of the western world were preserved by members of religious orders who isolated themselves from all worldly influences against great obstacles. there can be no assumption that todays majority is right and the amish and others like them are wrong. a way of life that is odd or even erratic but interferes with no rights or interests of others is not to be condemned because it is different. the state, however, supports its interest in providing an additional one or two years of compulsory high school education to amish children because of the possibility that some such children will choose to leave the amish community, and that if this occurs they will be ill-equipped for life. the state argues that if amish children leave their church they should not be in the position of making their way in the world without the education available in the one or two additional years the state requires. however, on this record, that argument is highly speculative. there is no specific evidence of the loss of amish adherents by attrition, nor is there any showing that upon leaving the amish community amish children, with their practical agricultural training and habits of industry and self-reliance, would become burdens on society because of educational shortcomings. indeed, this argument of the state appears to rest primarily on the states mistaken assumption, already noted, that the amish do not provide any education for their children beyond the eighth grade, but allow them to grow in ignorance. to the contrary, not only do the amish accept the necessity for formal schooling through the eighth grade level, but continue to provide what has been characterized by the undisputed testimony of expert educators as an ideal vocational education for their children in the adolescent years. there is nothing in this record to suggest that the amish qualities of reliability, self-reliance, and dedication to work would fail to find ready markets in todays society. absent some contrary evidence supporting the states position, we are unwilling to assume that persons possessing such valuable vocational skills and habits are doomed to become burdens on society should they determine to leave the amish faith, nor is there any basis in the record to warrant a finding that an additional one or two years of formal school education beyond the eighth grade would serve to eliminate any such problem that might exist. insofar as the states claim rests on the view that a brief additional period of formal education is imperative to enable the amish to participate effectively and intelligently in our democratic process, it must fall. the amish alternative to formal secondary school education has enabled them to function effectively in their day-to-day life under self-imposed limitations on relations with the world, and to survive and prosper in contemporary society as a separate, sharply identifiable and highly self-sufficient community for more than 200 years in this country. in itself this is strong evidence that they are capable of fulfilling the,social and political responsibilities of citizenship without compelled attendance beyond the eighth grade at the price of jeopardizing their free exercise of religious belief. 13 when thomas jefferson emphasized the need for education as a bulwark of a free people against tyranny, there is nothing to indicate he had in mind compulsory education through any fixed age beyond a basic education. indeed, the amish communities singularly parallel and reflect many of the virtues of jeffersons ideal of the sturdy yeoman who would form the basis of what he considered as the ideal of a democratic society. 14 even their idiosyncratic separateness exemplifies the diversity we profess to admire and encourage. the requirement for compulsory education beyond the eighth grade is a relatively recent development in our history. less than 60 years ago, the educational requirements of almost all of the states were satisfied by completion of the elementary grades, at least where the child was regularly and lawfully employed. 15 the inde pendence and successful social functioning of the amish community for a period approaching almost three centuries and more than 200 years in this country are strong evidence that there is at best a speculative gain, in terms of meeting the duties of citizenship, from an additional one or two years of compulsory formal education. against this background it would require a more particularized showing from the state on this point to justify the severe interference with religious freedom such additional compulsory attendance would entail. we should also note that compulsory education and child labor laws find their historical origin in common humanitarian instincts, and that the age limits of both laws have been coordinated to achieve their related objectives. 16 in the context of this case, such considera tions, if anything, support rather than detract from respondents position. the origins of the requirement for school attendance to age 16, an age falling after the completion of elementary school but before completion of high school, are not entirely clear. but to some extent such laws reflected the movement to prohibit most child labor under age 16 that culminated in the provisions of the federal fair labor standards act of 1938. 17 it is true, then, that the 16-year child labor age limit may to some degree derive from a contemporary impression that children should be in school until that age. but at the same time, it cannot be denied that, conversely, the 16-year education limit reflects, in substantial measure, the concern that children under that age not be employed under conditions hazardous to their health, or in work that should be performed by adults. the requirement of compulsory schooling to age 16 must therefore be viewed as aimed not merely at providing educational opportunities for children, but as an alternative to the equally undesirable consequence of unhealthful child labor displacing adult workers, or, on the other hand, forced idleness. 18 the two kinds of statutes-compulsory school attendance and child labor laws--tend to keep children of certain ages off the labor market and in school; this regimen in turn provides opportunity to prepare for a livelihood of a higher order than that which children could pursue without education and protects their health in adolescence. in these terms, wisconsins interest in compelling the school attendance of amish children to age 16 emerges as somewhat less substantial than requiring such attend- anee for children generally. for, while agricultural employment is not totally outside the legitimate concerns of the child labor laws, employment of children under parental guidance and on the family farm from age 14 to age 16 is an ancient tradition that lies at the periphery of the objectives of such laws. 19 there is no intimation that the amish employment of their children on family farms is in any way deleterious to their health or that amish parents exploit children at tender years. any such inference would be contrary to the record before us. moreover, employment of amish children on the family farm does not present the undesirable economic aspects of eliminating jobs that might otherwise be held by adults. iv finally, the state, on authority of prince v. massachusetts, argues that a decision exempting amish children from the states requirement fails to recognize the substantive right of the amish child to a secondary education, and fails to give due regard to the power of the state as parens patriae to extend the benefit of secondary education to children regardless of the wishes of their parents. taken at its broadest sweep, the courts language in prince, might be read to give support to the states position. however, the court was not confronted in prince with a situation comparable to that of the amish as revealed in this record; this is shown by the courts severe characterization of the evils that it thought the legislature could legitimately associate with child labor, even when performed in the company of an adult. 321 u. s., at 169-170. the court later took great care to confine prince to a narrow scope in sherbert v. verner, when it stated: on the other hand, the court has rejected challenges under the free exercise clause to governmental regulation of certain overt acts prompted by religious beliefs or principles, for even when the action is in accord with ones religious convictions, it is not totally free from legislative restrictions. braunjeld v. brown, 366 u. s. 599, 603. the conduct or actions so regulated have invariably posed some substantial threat to public safety, peace or order. see, e. g., reynolds v. united states, 98 u. s. 145; jacobson v. massachusetts, 197 u. s. 11; prince v. massachusetts, 321 u. s. 158.... 374 u. s., at 402-403. this case, of course, is not one in which any harm to the physical or mental health of the child or to the public safety, peace, order, or welfare has been demonstrated or may be properly inferred. 20 the record is to the contrary, and any reliance on that theory would find no support in the evidence. contrary to the suggestion of the dissenting opinion of mr. justice douglas, our holding today in no degree depends on the assertion of the religious interest of the child as contrasted with that of the parents. it is the parents who are subject to prosecution here for failing to cause their children to attend school, and it is their right of free exercise, not that of their children, that must determine wisconsins power to impose criminal penalties on the parent. the dissent argues that a child who expresses a desire to attend public high school in conflict with the wishes of his parents should not be prevented from doing so. there is no reason for the court to consider that point since it is not an issue in the case. the children are not parties to this litigation. the state has at no point tried this case on the theory that respondents were preventing their children from attending school against their expressed desires, and indeed the record is to the contrary. 21 the states position from the outset has been that it is empowered to apply its compulsory-attendance law to amish parents in the same manner as to other parents- that is, without regard to the wishes of the child. that is the claim we reject today. our holding in no way determines the proper resolution of possible competing interests of parents, children, and the state in an appropriate state court proceeding in which the power of the state is asserted on the theory that amish parents are preventing their minor children from attending high school despite their expressed desires to the contrary. recognition of the claim of the state in such a proceeding would, of course, call into question traditional concepts of parental control over the religious upbringing and education of their minor children recognized in this courts past decisions. it is clear that such an intrusion by a state into family decisions in the area of religious training would give rise to grave questions of religious freedom comparable to those raised here and those presented in pierce v. society of sisters, 268 u. s. 510(1925). on this record we neither reach nor decide those issues. the states argument proceeds without reliance on any actual conflict between the wishes of parents and children. it appears to rest on the potential that exemption of amish parents from the requirements of the compulsory-education law might allow some parents to act contrary to the best interests of their children by foreclosing their opportunity to make an intelligent choice between the amish way of life and that of the outside world. the same argument could, of course, be made with respect to all church schools short of college. there is nothing in the record or in the ordinary course of human experience to suggest that non-amish parents generally consult with children of ages 14^16 if they are placed in a church school of the parents faith. indeed it seems clear that if the state is empowered, as parens patriae, to save a child from himself or his amish parents by requiring an additional two years of compulsory formal high school education, the state will in large measure influence, if not determine, the religious future of the child. even more markedly than in prince, therefore, this case involves the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the state, to guide the religious future and education of their children. the history and culture of western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. this primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring american tradition. if not the first, perhaps the most significant statements of the court in this area are found in pierce v. society of sisters, in which the court observed: under the doctrine of meyer v. nebraska, 262 u. s. 390, we think it entirely plain that the act of 1922 unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control. as often heretofore pointed out, rights guaranteed by the constitution may not be abridged by legislation which has no reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the state. the fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. the child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations. 268 u. s., at 53 ^-535. the duty to prepare the child for additional obligations, referred to by the court, must be read to include the inculcation of moral standards, religious beliefs, and elements of good citizenship. pierce, of course, recognized that where nothing more than the general interest of the parent in the nurture and education of his children is involved, it is beyond dispute that the state acts reasonably and constitutionally in requiring education to age 16 in some public or private school meeting the standards prescribed by the state. however read, the courts holding in pierce stands as a charter of the rights of parents to direct the reli…
“would not only expose themselves to the danger of the censure of the church community, but * * * also endanger their own salvation and that of their children,”
The brief's quote matches 96% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …e of the church community, but * * * also endanger their own salva…
opinion: …e of the church community, but, as found by the county court, also endanger their own salva…
“fundamental interest of parents”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“by substantially interfering with the religious development of the Amish child and his integration into the way of life of the Amish faith community.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“crucial adolescent stage of development,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“crucial * * * period of religious development.”
The brief's quote matches 71% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …crucial * * * period of religious developme…
opinion: …al adolescent period of religious developme…
“intellectual and scientific accomplishments, self-distinction, competitiveness, worldly success, and social life with other students”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“teachers who are not of the Amish faith-and may even be hostile to it-interpose[d] a serious barrier to the integration of the Amish child into the Amish religious community.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“[p]roviding public schools ranks at the very apex of the function of a State,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[t]he requirement for compulsory education beyond the eighth grade [was] a relatively recent development.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“protect[ing] children from ignorance”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“be self-reliant and self-sufficient participants in society.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“any general power of the State to standardize its children.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“endanger their own”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“and that of their children.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“compelling attendance * * * unreasonably interfere[s]with the interest of parents in directing the rearing of their off-spring”
The brief's quote matches 90% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …compelling attendance * * * unreasonably interferewith th…
opinion: …compelling attendance in a public school from age eight to age 16 unreasonably interferewith th…
“any parent knows,”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“lack maturity,”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“impetuous and ill-considered actions and decisions,”
This quote does not appear in the cited opinion's text, but may be a canonical restatement of the opinion — the language appears in another opinion this brief cites.
“relatively recent development.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“convincing showing”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“substantially interfer[es] with the religious development”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“markedly circumscribed”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“unique record”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“[t]he history and culture of Western civilization”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[t]he fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[l]ong before there was general acknowledgment of the need for universal formal [sex] education.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“exposing [their] children to worldly influences”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“substantially interfer[e]with the religious development of [their] child.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“inescapable.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“traditional interest of parents with respect to the religious upbringing of their children”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“substantial interference”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“significant disruptions”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“safe and conducive”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“social stigma and isolation”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“state and federal nondiscrimination laws.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“cannot accept such * * * sweeping claim[s].”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“relatively recent”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“enduring American tradition”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
37 31, 32, 33, 35 44, 47, 48, 53 Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Zorach v. Clauson”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“follow[ing] the best of our traditions”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“respect[ing] the religious nature of our people and accommodat[ing] the public service to their spiritual needs.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
38 Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-102 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
39 Cal. Educ. Code § 51240 clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· medium confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on the state code's official online publication.
View text on state code →
40 Cal. Educ. Code § 51934 clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· medium confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on the state code's official online publication.
View text on state code →
41 Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-19 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
42 Ind. Code § 20-30-5-9 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
43 Mich. Comp. Laws § 380.1170 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
44 Mich. Comp. Laws § 380.1506 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
45 Mich. Comp. Laws § 380.1507a manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
46 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 79-531 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
47 Okla. Admin. Code § 210:10-2-3 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
48 Okla. Stat. tit. 25, § 2003 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
49 Okla. Stat. tit. 70, § 11-105 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
50 Or. Rev. Stat. § 336.455 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
51 Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.300.475 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
52 54 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 579 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
53 13 N.Y.L. Sch. J. Hum. Rts. 589 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
54 19 Yale J.L. & Feminism 495 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· source text unavailable
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
Quotes attributed to this authority
These quotes have not been verified because the source text wasn't retrieved.
Porn literacy
Not verified: source text unavailable.
55 Okla. Stat. tit. 70, § 11-105.1 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
56 Or. Rev. Stat. § 336 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
57 Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.300 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
58 Id. clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
How we matched this
Constitutional citation.
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
60 U.S. Const. Amend. I clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
How we matched this
Constitutional citation.
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
61 Fourteenth Amendment clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
How we matched this
Constitutional citation.
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
§Record & filing references (23)
Citations to filings in this case or its record — appendices, docket entries, pleadings. These aren't published authority, so we don't retrieve or verify them. They're listed here so every citation in the brief is accounted for.
http://bit.ly/4iepRQw
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- once you enroll your children in public schools, you have to recognize that they may be exposed to this material.
https://perma.cc/86PU-3QLA
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- Valentine's day
- viewed by others as having religious overtones.
https://perma.cc/BRL8-MSH3
web source
not verified
https://perma.cc/V5QL-9MNG
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- require comprehensive sex education to be taught in all schools
https://perma.cc/2QZB-9SS9
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- power hierarchies.
- lip ring,
- [drag] king
- [drag] queen,
- Marsha P. Johnson,
https://perma.cc/EPR7-AXBB
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- concerns about the content.
https://perma.cc/JH3S-LQKG
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- largely * * * Muslim and Ethiopian Orthodox parents
https://perma.cc/MJ2Q-BXTW
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- a special curriculum from which people may have the opt-out right in Maryland.
- largely * * * Muslim and Ethiopian Orthodox parents,
App.539a (quoting The Pontifical Council for the Family, The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality: Guidelines for Education within the Family, 78
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- accept [his] own body as it was created
- attain [his] fullest God-given potential by embracing [his] biological sex.
- 'the years of innocence' from about five years of age until puberty,
- must never be disturbed by unnecessary information about sex.
https://perma.cc/3DHP-SEJD
web source
not verified
https://perma.cc/84LN-7B3E
web source
not verified
Compl. at 10
party filing
not verified
https://perma.cc/68QW-MXLE
web source
not verified
https://perma.cc/ZTR6-G6LC
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- Porn literacy
https://perma.cc/8L5G-XQ9X
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- instruction related to family life and human sexuality objectives.
https://perma.cc/5GD9-2YVQ
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- white supremacists
https://perma.cc/A7BB-R35Y
web source
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- treat[ing] all people with dignity and respect
- all gender identities and expressions.
Footnote 3
footnote
not verified
Footnote 10
footnote
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- Bathrooms Are For Every Bunny
- [choose] the bathroom that is comfy.
Footnote 11
footnote
not verified
Footnote 13
footnote
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- The Rainbow Parade
- includes depictions of a naked person shown from behind, furries, and a gay couple outfitted in leather BDSM * * * attire
Footnote 14
footnote
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- non-binary gender pronouns
Footnote 17
footnote
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- [s]ex play with friends of the same gender is not uncommon during early adolescence,