Black v. Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources
Decision Date | 03 September 1986 |
Docket Number | AB-161 |
Citation | 301 Or. 221,721 P.2d 451 |
Parties | Galen W. BLACK, Respondent on review, v. EMPLOYMENT DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, Ray Thorne, Administrator, Petitioners on review. and ADAPT, Respondent (below). EAB 84-; CA A31186; SC S32482. |
Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
James E. Mountain, Jr., Sol. Gen., Salem, argued the cause for petitioner on review. With him on the petition for review were Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., and Michael D. Reynolds and Jeff Bennett, Asst. Attys. Gen., Salem.
David Morrison, of Heiling & Morrison, P.C., Roseburg, argued the cause for respondent on review.
David M. Gordon, of Thorp, Dennett, Purdy, Golden & Jewett, P.C., Springfield, filed a brief amicus curiae on behalf of American Civil Liberties Union.
Before PETERSON, C.J., and LENT, LINDE, CAMPBELL, CARSON and JONES, JJ.
This is a companion case to Smith v. Employment Division, 301 Or. 209, 721 P.2d 445 (1986) (decided this date). Claimant appealed an Employment Appeals Board (EAB) order denying unemployment compensation benefits. Claimant's employer discharged him for ingesting peyote during a Native American Church ceremony.
The employer, Douglas County Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Treatment (ADAPT), hired claimant as a resident assistant September 12, 1982. ADAPT's policy is to suspend or discharge employees who abuse alcohol or other drugs because it considers its employees role models for persons they treat. Claimant had a history of substance abuse but had not used drugs since early 1982. After two promotions, claimant became a drug rehabilitation counselor in June 1983.
Claimant, like Smith in the companion case, belongs to the Native American Church and attends services weekly. During a Church ceremony on September 10, 1983, claimant ingested a small amount of peyote "for spiritual reasons, as a communion." When claimant's supervisor discovered that claimant had ingested peyote, he told claimant to choose between resignation, discharge or entry into an inpatient treatment program. Contending that his ingestion of peyote was not a relapse into drug abuse, claimant rejected the treatment offer, and on October 3, 1983, ADAPT discharged him. John Gardin, ADAPT's executive director, stated that
When the Employment Division denied benefits, claimant requested a hearing. At the hearing, claimant argued that he had a right to practice his religion any way he chose, including the ingestion of peyote, and further asserted that the only reason he took the drug was as part of the spiritual ceremony at the Native American Church. After the hearing, the referee concluded that claimant's ingestion of peyote was "an isolated instance of poor judgment," and therefore not misconduct justifying denial of benefits. OAR 471-30-038(3).
After the referee's decision for claimant, the employer requested review by EAB, which denied benefits. The EAB order referred to claimant's religious use of peyote as follows:
(Emphasis added.)
and concluded:
The question in this case, as in Smith v. Employment Division, supra, is whether the denial of unemployment compensation benefits because claimant used peyote in a Native American Church ceremony unconstitutionally infringes upon his right to the free exercise of his religion. As in Smith, we hold that denial of unemployment compensation benefits did not violate Article I, sections 2 and 3, of the Oregon Constitution, but did violate the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2
Although the referee failed to make precise factual findings, we infer from the EAB's somewhat anemic conclusions that the Native American Church is a recognized religion, that peyote is the sacrament of the Church, and that claimant was a member of the Church and an active participant in the religious ceremonies of the Church.
Other courts have noted the role of peyote in the ceremonies and practices of the Native American Church. For instance, in People v. Woody, 61 Cal.2d 716, 720-21, 40 Cal.Rptr. 69, 394 P.2d 813 (1964), the California Supreme Court wrote:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ex parte Tucci
... ... isolated from the rest of the world and human experience in 1836, 1845, 28 or 1876, 29 nor ... can be read as approaching Justice Black's absolutist vision of free expression. The ... SHARE, 721 P.2d 918; Thompson v. Police Dept. of New York, 145 Misc.2d 417, 546 N.Y.S.2d 945 ... Employment Div., 301 Or. 221, 721 P.2d 451 (1986) (freedom ... ...
-
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Black
... ... Verner, 374 U.S. 398, 83 S.Ct. 1790, 10 L.Ed.2d 965, and Thomas v. Review Bd., Indiana Employment Security Div., 450 U.S. 707, 101 S.Ct. 1425, 67 L.Ed.2d 624, required the court to hold that the denials significantly burdened respondents' religious freedom in ... ...
-
Meltebeke v. Bureau of Labor and Industries
... ... that he had committed an unlawful employment practice by discriminating against one of his ... Page 863 ... State ex rel. Juv. Dept. v. Tucker, 83 Or.App. 330, 333, 731 P.2d 1051 ... Employment Div. v. Rogue Valley Youth for Christ, 307 Or. 490, ... 376, 799 P.2d 148 (1990),] and Black v. Employment Division, 301 Or. 221, 721 P.2d 451 ... Planned Parenthood Assn. v. Dept. of Human Res., 297 Or. 562, 564, 687 P.2d 785 (1984). In ... Seitz v. Albina Human Resources Center, 100 Or.App. 665, 672, 788 P.2d 1004 ... ...
-
Warner v. Graham
... ... specialist employed by the Lake Region Human Services Center, provided preventive drug and ... Smith v. Employment Div., 301 Or. 209, 721 P.2d 445 (1986), cert ... 1368, 94 L.Ed.2d 684 (1987); Black v. Employment Div., 301 Or. 221, 721 P.2d 451 ... ...