| Syllabus | Opinion [ Kennedy ] | Concurrence [ Stevens ] | Concurrence [ Scalia ] | Dissent [ OConnor ] | Dissent [ Souter ] | Dissent [ Breyer ] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version |
Breyer, J., dissenting
[June 25, 1997]
Justice Breyer, dissenting.
I agree with Justice OConnor that the Court should direct the parties to brief the question whether Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) was correctly decided, and set this case for reargument. I do not, however, find it necessary to consider the question whether, assuming Smith is correct, §5 of the Fourteenth Amendment would authorize Congress to enact the legislation before us. Thus, while I agree with some of the views expressed in the first paragraph of Part I of Justice OConnors dissent, I do not necessarily agree with all of them. I therefore join Justice OConnors dissent, with the exception of the first paragraph of Part I.
<&/inclusions/footer.htm &>