Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Braunfeld Et Al. v. Brown, Commissioner Of Police Of Philadelphia, Et Al.

• 1960 • 366 U.S. 599 • Warren Court
The Braunfeld v. Brown case in 1960 revolved around a Pennsylvania law that prohibited retail selling of certain goods on Sundays, which was challenged by Orthodox Jewish merchants who observed Saturday as their Sabbath and were thus forced to close their businesses for two days instead of one. The plaintiffs argued this violated the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause because it indirectly coerced them into violating their religious practices. However, the Supreme Court upheld the law with...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Warren Court
Term: 1960
Docket: 67
366 U.S. 599
81 S. Ct. 1144
6 L. Ed. 2d 563
1961 U.S. LEXIS 1059
Argued: Dec 08, 1960

Braunfeld Et Al. v. Brown, Commissioner Of Police Of Philadelphia, Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Braunfeld v. Brown case in 1960 revolved around a Pennsylvania law that prohibited retail selling of certain goods on Sundays, which was challenged by Orthodox Jewish merchants who observed Saturday as their Sabbath and were thus forced to close their businesses for two days instead of one. The plaintiffs argued this violated the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause because it indirectly coerced them into violating their religious practices. However, the Supreme Court upheld the law with a 6-3 decision, stating that while it may have made practicing religion more expensive for some people, it did not make any religious practice unlawful or deny anyone equal protection under the law. The court ruled that states had power to enact such laws if they served secular purposes like providing a uniform day of rest for all citizens.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Braunfeld v. Brown, Justice William O. Douglas argued that Pennsylvania's Sunday closing laws violated the First Amendment rights of Orthodox Jewish merchants who observed Saturday as their day of rest and were thus forced to close their businesses two days a week instead of one like other businesses. He contended that this law placed an undue burden on those practicing religions with different Sabbath observances than mainstream Christianity, thereby infringing upon religious freedom. Furthermore, he questioned whether these laws truly served a secular purpose or if they merely perpetuated Christian norms under the guise of promoting general welfare and public order.

Opinion written by Justice EWarren
Decided: May 29, 1961
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms