Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court upheld a Free Exercise claim based on the allegations that the state of Texas had discriminated against a Buddhist prisoner by "denying him a reasonable opportunity to pursue his Buddhist faith comparable to that offered other prisoners adhering to conventional religious precepts."
Case name Citation Date decided Boyd v. Dutton: 405 U.S. 1: 1972: Colombo v. New York: 405 U.S. 9: 1972: Roudebush v. Hartke: 405 U.S. 15: 1972: Parisi v. Davidson
405 U.S. 251 (1972) States cannot sue for general economic damage due to violation of antitrust laws Cruz v. Beto: 405 U.S. 319 (1972) Free exercise of religion while in prison custody Commissioner v. First Security Bank of Utah, N.A. 405 U.S. 394 (1972) Tax reporting for banks prohibited from doing insurance business Eisenstadt v. Baird: 405 U ...
In the 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case Cruz v. Beto, the court upheld a Free Exercise discrimination claim against a Buddhist prisoner, Fred Cruz. [2] In early 1972, Beto announced that he planned to resign from TDC [3] but was still director on June 29, 1972, at the beginning of the lawsuit Ruiz v. Estelle. [1]
Pages in category "1972 in United States case law" ... Cruz v. Beto; E. Eisenstadt v. Baird; F. FTC v. Sperry & Hutchinson Trading Stamp Co. Flood v. Kuhn; Fuentes v ...
Cruz v. Beto, a 1972 United States Supreme Court case against George Beto This page was last edited on 4 February 2025, at 11:44 (UTC). Text is available under the ...
The history of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause follows a broad arc, beginning with approximately 100 years of little attention, then taking on a relatively narrow view of the governmental restrictions required under the clause, growing into a much broader view in the 1960s, and later again receding.
[23] In the case of Miller v. Commissioner, the taxpayers objected to the use of social security numbers, arguing that such numbers related to the "mark of the beast" from the Bible. In its decision, the U.S. Court discussed the applicability of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, but ruled against the taxpayers. [24] In Navajo Nation v.