# City of Boerne v. Flores

> Supreme Court of the United States · June 25, 1997 · 521 U.S. 507

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9433514

## Case

- **Full name:** CITY OF BOERNE v. FLORES, ARCHBISHOP OF SAN ANTONIO, Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** June 25, 1997
- **Citations:** 521 U.S. 507; 11 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 140; 97 Daily Journal DAR 7973; 1997 Colo. J. C.A.R. 1329; 65 U.S.L.W. 4612; 70 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,785; 74 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 62; 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4904; 117 S. Ct. 2157; 138 L. Ed. 2d 624; 1997 U.S. LEXIS 4035
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Breyer
- **Judges:** Kennedy, Rehnquist, Stevens, Thomas, Ginsburg, Scalia, Iii-A-, O'Connor, Breyer, Souter
- **Cited by:** 1,711 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Yellow flag:** Reported superseded by statute, as recognized in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. — not on the Supreme Court's list.
- Negative treatments: 2
- Distinguished by: 1
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9433514

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding that Katzenbach confronted a “widespread and persisting deprivation of constitutional rights resulting from this country’s history of racial discrimination”
- holding that the Religious Free- _________________________________________________________________ DPPA. 7 Although the Supreme Court's ground breaking decision in City of Boerne v. Flores, 117 S. Ct. 2157 (1997), was decided in June of 1997, the United States did not cite the…
- stating that, with regard to Congress’ enforcement power under the Fourteenth Amendment: “ ‘Whatever legislation is appropriate, that is adapted to carry out the objects the amendments have in view, whatever tends to enforce submission to the prohibitions they contain ... if n…
- finding that the "least restrictive means” prong of RFRA was coextensive with the Supreme Court’s decision in Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396, 94 S.Ct. 1800, 40 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974), in which the "limitation of First Amendment freedoms must be no greater than is necessary or…

## Opinion text

Justice Breyer,
dissenting.
I agree with Justice O’Connor 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 re-argument. 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 O’Connor’s dissent, I do not necessarily agree with all of them. I therefore join Justice O’Connor’s dissent, with the exception of the first paragraph of Part I.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9433514. Public record. Not legal advice.