Question

A city ordinance that gave churches veto power over the grant of liquor licenses for businesses within a quarter mile of the church was struck down by the state's supreme court. In its decision, the court noted that even if the ordinance were not a violation of the federal Establishment Clause, it clearly violated a provision in the state constitution requiring the separation of church and state because it delegated governmental authority to the churches. The supreme court opinion also harshly criticized the city council for passing an ordinance that was clearly a violation of state law.To comply with the court's decision and avoid future criticism, the city council adopted an ordinance prohibiting any cleric from sitting on any public board within the city. A cleric who is currently on a school board within the city brings a suit in federal district court to have the ordinance declared unconstitutional.How should the court rule?A Uphold the ordinance, because it has a secular purpose and it does not promote excessive entanglement between government and religion.B Uphold the ordinance, because the previous court decision was based on adequate and independent state grounds.C Hold the ordinance unconstitutional, because its passage violated the cleric's right to procedural due process.D Hold the ordinance unconstitutional, because it violates the Free Exercise Clause.

Answer 1

Answer: the correct answer is D Hold the ordinance unconstitutional, because it violates the Free Exercise Clause.

Explanation: The Free Exercise Clause basically states prohibition to the Government from acting in a way that interferes with the free exercise of Religion.