Religious Freedoms
Sunday Blue Laws
[McGowan and Braunfeld v. Brown – McGowan rejects a free exercise challenge because the petitioner did not claim it infringed on his religious beliefs. Braunfeld only deals with the free exercise challenge because a separate case, decided along with McGowan and Braunfeld, also dealt with it. They were decided the same day along with two other cases.]
McGowan v. Maryland (1961)
366 U.S. 420 (1961)
Vote: 8-1
Decision: Affirmed
Majority: Warren, joined by Black, Clark, Brennan, Whittaker, Stewart
Concurrence: Frankfurter, joined by Harlan
Dissent: Douglas
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court.
…
The issues in this case concern the constitutional validity of Maryland criminal statutes, commonly known as Sunday Closing Laws or Sunday Blue Laws. These statutes, with exceptions to be noted hereafter, generally proscribe all labor, business and other commercial activities on Sunday. The questions presented are whether the classifications within the statutes bring about a denial of equal protection of the law, whether the laws are so vague as to fail to give reasonable notice of the forbidden conduct and therefore violate due process, and whether the statutes are laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …
Appellants argue that the Maryland statutes violate the “Equal Protection” Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment …
It would seem that a legislature could reasonably find that the Sunday sale of the exempted commodities was necessary either for the health of the populace or for the enhancement of the recreational atmosphere of the day-that a family which takes a Sunday ride into the country will need gasoline for the automobile and may find pleasant a soft drink or fresh fruit; that those who go to the beach may wish ice cream or some other item normally sold there; that some people will prefer alcoholic beverages or games of chance to add to their relaxation; that newspapers and drug products should always be available to the public. The record is barren of any indication that this apparently reasonable basis does not exist, that the statutory distinctions are invidious, that local tradition and custom might not rationally call for this legislative treatment …
The final questions for decision are whether the Maryland Sunday Closing Laws conflict with the Federal Constitution’s provisions for religious liberty. First, appellants contend here that the statutes applicable to Anne Arundel County violate the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion in that the statutes’ effect is to prohibit the free exercise of religion in contravention of the First Amendment, made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment. But appellants allege only economic injury to themselves; they do not allege any infringement of their own religious freedoms due to Sunday closing. In fact, the record is silent as to what appellants’ religious beliefs are. Since the gene