Bowen v. Roy
Encyclopedia
Bowen v. Roy, 476 U.S. 693 (1986), was a United States Supreme Court
case which helped to establish limits on freedom of religion
in the United States.
The plaintiffs were Native American
parents who had applied for financial assistance under a U.S. government welfare program. One of the requirements to receive benefits under this program was that the applicants supply Social Security number
s for their children and themselves. The plaintiffs refused to do so for their daughter, as they claimed use of this number outside her choosing to do so when she came of age, a form of spiritual self-actualization, would violate their religious beliefs. Their belief was that using a social security number to identify her would diminish her spiritual uniqueness and "rob her spirit". At trial Roy testified "..It serves unique purposes. It's applied to her and only her; and being applied to her, that's what offends us, and we try to keep her person unique, and we try to keep her spirit unique, and we're scared that if we were to use this number, she would lose control of that and she would have no ability to protect herself from any evil that that number might be used against her." . Other religious faiths have expressed closely similar objections--biblical Christians quoting Revelations, asserting that the SSN is one of a system of numbers the Antichrist will cause all people in American society to accept and use in order to function, to buy or sell goods, or social security numbers are the "mark of the beast", of the Antichrist who threatens to control the world and to accept a number is to "serve the beast.".
When the Roys refused to provide a social security number for their daughter and the government cut benefits for Little Bird of the Snow, they filed suit, claiming infringement of their right to practice their religion. In the Middle District Court for Pennsylvania, both sides stipulated before and during trial that Little Bird of the Snow did not have a Social Security number. During the last day of the trial, the Social Security administration disclosed it did, after a search, already possess a social security number issued shortly after Little Bird of the Snow's birth.
In its brief before the Court, the government's brief informed the Social Security Administration "..itself assigns [Social Security numbers] to persons who are required by federal law to have one but decline to complete an application. If, for religious reasons, the individual requiring [a Social Security number] does not wish to receive a social security card, the agency will accommodate that request. Similarly, when an applicant refuses to sign an application for [a Social Security number] on religious grounds, [Social Security Administration personnel] may sign in lieu of the applicant."
The Supreme Court ruled that, the government's use of a Social Security number for the child did not impair her family's freedom to "believe, express and exercise" their religion, the plaintiffs' claim was without merit. In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger
noted that "never to our knowledge has the Court interpreted the First Amendment to require the Government itself to behave in ways that the individual believes will further his or her spiritual development or that of his or her family.", vacating an injunction entered by the District Court enjoining use of the social security number by the government.
Justice O'Connor noted "The Government still refuses to concede that it should now provide welfare benefits to Little Bird of the Snow, even though it now claims to possess Little Bird of the Snow's Social Security number".
By a plurality decision, it was remanded back to the Federal District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, for a hearing on whether the government complied with the Privacy Act in issuing and using a Social Security number.
It was eventually settled with the plaintiffs and government agreeing that all records and data in all its computers containing a social security number for Little Bird of the Snow Roy were to be eradicated or erased.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
case which helped to establish limits on freedom of religion
Freedom of religion
Freedom of religion is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any...
in the United States.
The plaintiffs were Native American
Native Americans in the United States
Native Americans in the United States are the indigenous peoples in North America within the boundaries of the present-day continental United States, parts of Alaska, and the island state of Hawaii. They are composed of numerous, distinct tribes, states, and ethnic groups, many of which survive as...
parents who had applied for financial assistance under a U.S. government welfare program. One of the requirements to receive benefits under this program was that the applicants supply Social Security number
Social Security number
In the United States, a Social Security number is a nine-digit number issued to U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and temporary residents under section 205 of the Social Security Act, codified as . The number is issued to an individual by the Social Security Administration, an independent...
s for their children and themselves. The plaintiffs refused to do so for their daughter, as they claimed use of this number outside her choosing to do so when she came of age, a form of spiritual self-actualization, would violate their religious beliefs. Their belief was that using a social security number to identify her would diminish her spiritual uniqueness and "rob her spirit". At trial Roy testified "..It serves unique purposes. It's applied to her and only her; and being applied to her, that's what offends us, and we try to keep her person unique, and we try to keep her spirit unique, and we're scared that if we were to use this number, she would lose control of that and she would have no ability to protect herself from any evil that that number might be used against her." . Other religious faiths have expressed closely similar objections--biblical Christians quoting Revelations, asserting that the SSN is one of a system of numbers the Antichrist will cause all people in American society to accept and use in order to function, to buy or sell goods, or social security numbers are the "mark of the beast", of the Antichrist who threatens to control the world and to accept a number is to "serve the beast.".
When the Roys refused to provide a social security number for their daughter and the government cut benefits for Little Bird of the Snow, they filed suit, claiming infringement of their right to practice their religion. In the Middle District Court for Pennsylvania, both sides stipulated before and during trial that Little Bird of the Snow did not have a Social Security number. During the last day of the trial, the Social Security administration disclosed it did, after a search, already possess a social security number issued shortly after Little Bird of the Snow's birth.
In its brief before the Court, the government's brief informed the Social Security Administration "..itself assigns [Social Security numbers] to persons who are required by federal law to have one but decline to complete an application. If, for religious reasons, the individual requiring [a Social Security number] does not wish to receive a social security card, the agency will accommodate that request. Similarly, when an applicant refuses to sign an application for [a Social Security number] on religious grounds, [Social Security Administration personnel] may sign in lieu of the applicant."
The Supreme Court ruled that, the government's use of a Social Security number for the child did not impair her family's freedom to "believe, express and exercise" their religion, the plaintiffs' claim was without merit. In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger
Warren E. Burger
Warren Earl Burger was the 15th Chief Justice of the United States from 1969 to 1986. Although Burger had conservative leanings, the U.S...
noted that "never to our knowledge has the Court interpreted the First Amendment to require the Government itself to behave in ways that the individual believes will further his or her spiritual development or that of his or her family.", vacating an injunction entered by the District Court enjoining use of the social security number by the government.
Justice O'Connor noted "The Government still refuses to concede that it should now provide welfare benefits to Little Bird of the Snow, even though it now claims to possess Little Bird of the Snow's Social Security number".
By a plurality decision, it was remanded back to the Federal District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, for a hearing on whether the government complied with the Privacy Act in issuing and using a Social Security number.
It was eventually settled with the plaintiffs and government agreeing that all records and data in all its computers containing a social security number for Little Bird of the Snow Roy were to be eradicated or erased.
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 476
- List of United States Supreme Court cases
- Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
- List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Rehnquist Court
External links
- Bowen v. Roy at the University of Virginia