Amish communities, which strive to live apart from the modern world, have often had to assert their Free Exercise rights in the face of various state and local government regulation that intrudes upon their simple, unadorned lifestyle. In most of Pennsylvania, the Amish have adjusted to such rules, including a state requirement that slow moving vehicles mount a day-glow orange triangle on the rear of the vehicle (an "SMV" emblem). They're a common sight on Amish buggies in "Pennsylvania Dutch" country around Lancaster, for example.
In 1997, about 80 members of a particularly conservative branch of the Amish, the "Andy Weaver group" of the Swartzentruber Amish, moved from Ohio to farmland in western Pennsylvania. They refuse to display the orange SMV emblem, on grounds that the gaudy color is offensive, and because their beliefs require them to reject symbols or images (one member of the group testified that display of the triangle would indicate he was placing his faith in that symbol, rather than in God). Instead, they outline the rear portion of their buggies with grey reflective tape.
Since moving into the state, members of the community have been cited 27 times for refusing to have an SMV triangle on their buggies, each citation carrying a $93 fine. The cases were consolidated in a trial before Cambria County Court of Common Pleas Judge Timothy P. Creany. After hearing several days of testimony during April and May 2002, Judge Creany issued a decision on June 6 in which he found that Pennsylvania had a compelling government interest ("the safety of the traveling public") in requiring use of the orange triangle, and that "the grey reflective tape is not as effective as the SMV emblem over the spectrum of situations."
Judge Creany wrote that he "admires the lifestyles of this community" and their "sincere religious beliefs," but added that the court "does not have legislative authority" that would allow it to "exempt these individuals from the effect of this statute." If change was to be made, "it must come from the legislative arm of government." Legislation that would have designated grey reflective tape an acceptable alternative (as is the case in other states with Amish communities, such as Michigan, Minnesota,Wisconsin and Kentucky) ws defeated in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives on June 27, 2002 by a vote of 167-29.
The Swartzentruber Amish have appealed the case to the Superior Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
In an amicus curiae brief (PDF format, 136K) filed with Superior Court on November 7, 2002, The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty urged the court to decide the case using the highest standard ("strict scrutiny") of legal review, rather than the "rational basis" standard that might apply under the U.S. Constitution. Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution states that:
"All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious establishments or modes of worship."
"These clauses have no counterpart in the text of the First Amendment [to the U.S. Constitution]," the Becket Fund brief notes, and provide "broader protection under the State than the federal Constitution." In its 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith, the U.S. Supreme Court "retreated from the protection of First Amendment Free Exercise rights," making it "imperative that the citizens of Pennsylvania be able to turn to their Constitution and receive the protections is was intended to provide."
"Given the abdication by the United States Supreme Court of its role as protector of the free exercise of religion," the Becket Fund brief states, "a persuasive policy reason exists for Pennsylvania and its Courts to continue to apply a high standard of scrutiny when interpreting its own Constitution."
The Amish are represented in the case by Donna Doblick, of the law firm of Reed Smith, and by Witold Walczak, of the ACLU. (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Jonas Miller, et al., on appeal to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Case no. 1124 WDA 2002)
Media Coverage:
Amish appeal buggy ruling (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, by Tom Gibb, October 20, 2002)
Amish told to put symbols on buggies (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, by Tom Gibb, June 7, 2002)