108.49.28.78

Another problematic passage on First Amendment rights

The following statement is contradictory, is begging the question, incomplete, and is consequently nonsensical:

"Even under the act, however, tribes did not have the First Amendment rights for certain religious practices,[16] notably, the sacramental use of peyote. This was upheld in the 1990 case Employment Division v. Smith which held that the First Amendment does not protect the sacramental ingestion of peyote in Native American religious ceremonies from criminal sanctions.[13]"

The second sentence plainly states that using peyote is not protected by the First Amendment, a doctrine subsequently upheld against the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which would have made it a First Amendment right, in 2 following landmark cases. Therefore "tribes did not have the First Amendment rights", because those right never existed in the first place, a legal framework that is universal to the practice of religions in the United States. What is missing in the fact that U.S. Code expressly permits the use of peyote and other practices by Native American tribes since 1965, when the issue first arose under the law. This permission was reaffirmed by Congress in 1996 and remains in force today; the fact is, since the 1950s there are essentially no restrictions of the practice of Native American religions not applied to every other religion at a federal level.

The overall impression this article gives is that it was written by a person or persons with a well blinkered outlook on the Code of Indian Offenses, the processes and motivations of the United States government and "Western" culture generally, a rudimentary and flawed understanding of U.S. laws and the status of Native Americans following 1924. This creates an impression that is factually and contextually inaccurate throughout, and lacks reason and credibility, especially when a cursory search brings up numerous reliable sources that do a far better job on these fronts.

---