analyze significance of Wisconsin v. Yoder
In Wisconsin v. Yoder, the Supreme Court placed religious freedom ahead of the state's interest in an informed population. The Court determined that an individual's right to worship openly outweighed the state's interest in compelled attendance. Yoder has made significant contributions to the Court's ongoing attempt to understand the Free Exercise Clause. The Supreme Court created the belief-action distinction in Reynolds v. United States (2010), holding that for a while.
Although the First Amendment protects personal convictions, people can also be found liable for acts taken in accordance with such views that contradict state or federal laws. Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940) departed from the strict religion-action standard, holding that the government could not impose an unreasonable restriction on religious activity in addition to belief. The Court expanded the right of free exercise to include unintentional limitations on religious expression, in Sherbert v. Verner (2013).
Wisconsin v. Yoder, the Supreme Court's ruling, elicited a range of responses. To others, it seemed as if it would significantly expand both statutory rights for religious liberty and parental power of schooling. To some, the Court's narrow attention on the details of the case and emphasis on what it perceived to be the peculiar existence of the Amish condition reduced the case's precedential value and effectively restricted religious exemptions in future litigation.