Civics & Government · 9th Grade

Active learning ideas

Religious Freedom: Free Exercise Clause

Active learning works well for this topic because students must wrestle with nuanced, real-world conflicts between religious practices and government laws. Analyzing cases and debating standards helps them move beyond abstract rules to see how the Free Exercise Clause plays out in everyday situations.

• Common Core State Standards
• C3: D2.Civ.10.9-12
• C3: D2.Civ.14.9-12

• 20–50 min
• Pairs → Whole Class
• 4 activities

Activity 01

• Case Study Analysis
• 50 min · Small Groups

Competing Rights Analysis: Wedding Vendor Cases

Present a factual summary of a religious vendor case. Small groups of four each take a role: the vendor, the customer, the state civil rights commission, and a neutral constitutional analyst. Each role prepares a two-minute statement, then the class engages in structured dialogue. The debrief identifies which constitutional texts are in direct tension and how courts resolve the conflict.

Explain how the government should balance religious liberty with anti-discrimination laws.

Facilitation Tip

During Competing Rights Analysis, assign roles (e.g., vendor, customer, judge) to push students to argue from multiple perspectives.

What to look for

Pose the following scenario: 'A city ordinance requires all businesses serving food to obtain a permit. A small, family-owned restaurant, whose owners observe a strict religious Sabbath and close every Saturday, argues they should be exempt from the permit requirement because it conflicts with their religious practice. Analyze the rights of the restaurant owners and the city. What test might a court use to decide this case, and what factors would be most important?'

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

Activity 02

• Case Study Analysis
• 30 min · Pairs

Spectrum: How Strong Is the Government's Interest?

Read six scenarios involving religious exemption claims -- from drug use in religious ceremonies, to vaccine exemptions, to refusing same-sex adoption placements. For each, students place the government's countervailing interest on a spectrum from 'weak' to 'compelling.' After individual placements, pairs defend their ratings, then the class reviews how courts actually evaluated comparable interests.

Analyze the rights in tension when religious practices conflict with general laws.

Facilitation Tip

For Spectrum: How Strong Is the Government's Interest?, require students to justify their placements with evidence from the cases.

What to look for

Provide students with short summaries of two hypothetical court cases involving the Free Exercise Clause (e.g., one about a religious symbol on public property, another about a religious exemption from a vaccine mandate). Ask students to identify the specific religious practice at issue, the government action being challenged, and whether the law involved appears to be neutral and generally applicable or targeted.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

Activity 03

• Fishbowl Discussion
• 40 min · Whole Class

Fishbowl Discussion: Smith vs. RFRA -- Which Standard Is Better?

An inner circle debates whether Employment Division v. Smith or RFRA's compelling interest test better protects religious freedom and civil rights simultaneously. Students draw on the text of both and at least one decided case. The outer circle tracks how each speaker defines 'religious freedom' -- as an individual right, an institutional right, or a right against discrimination.

Evaluate the 'compelling interest' test in Free Exercise cases.

Facilitation Tip

In Fishbowl: Smith vs. RFRA -- Which Standard Is Better?, model active listening by having observers track the arguments made by each side.

What to look for

Ask students to write one sentence explaining the main difference between protecting religious belief and protecting religious conduct under the Free Exercise Clause. Then, have them write one sentence describing a situation where religious liberty might conflict with another important societal value.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Social Awareness
• Self-Awareness

Activity 04

• Think-Pair-Share
• 20 min · Pairs

Think-Pair-Share: Religious Exemptions and Equal Treatment

Ask pairs to consider: if a pharmacist claims a religious exemption from filling contraceptive prescriptions, should it be granted? Students identify the competing rights, the government interests, and the likely real-world consequences. Debrief asks whether the answer should depend on whether the pharmacist is the only pharmacy in the area -- a constraint that shifts the calculus.

Explain how the government should balance religious liberty with anti-discrimination laws.

Facilitation Tip

Use Think-Pair-Share: Religious Exemptions and Equal Treatment to encourage quieter students to formulate thoughts before speaking.

What to look for

Pose the following scenario: 'A city ordinance requires all businesses serving food to obtain a permit. A small, family-owned restaurant, whose owners observe a strict religious Sabbath and close every Saturday, argues they should be exempt from the permit requirement because it conflicts with their religious practice. Analyze the rights of the restaurant owners and the city. What test might a court use to decide this case, and what factors would be most important?'

• Understand
• Apply
• Analyze
• Self-Awareness
• Relationship Skills

A few notes on teaching this unit

Experienced teachers approach this topic by grounding abstract legal tests in concrete cases first, then gradually introducing the tests themselves. Avoid starting with the Sherbert or Smith tests alone, as students need the context of real disputes to see why these tests matter. Research shows that students retain legal concepts better when they analyze cases first and then generalize the rules from their discussions.

Students will demonstrate understanding by accurately applying legal tests to cases, distinguishing between belief and conduct, and weighing competing rights in discussions. They should leave able to explain when religious conduct receives protection and when it does not.

---

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

• During Competing Rights Analysis: Wedding Vendor Cases, students may assume that religious freedom always trumps anti-discrimination laws.

  Use the activity to redirect this assumption by asking students to evaluate whether the vendor’s refusal targets a specific religion or burdens religious practice incidentally, then apply the relevant legal standard.

• During Spectrum: How Strong Is the Government's Interest?, students may think that any government interest is compelling enough to override religious claims.

  Have students revisit the cases in the activity to identify what kinds of interests the Court has deemed compelling (e.g., public health, anti-discrimination) and which it has not.

• During Fishbowl: Smith vs. RFRA -- Which Standard Is Better?, students may conflate the two standards as interchangeable.

  Use the fishbowl to clarify that Smith applies a rational basis test for neutral, generally applicable laws, while RFRA imposes a stricter scrutiny standard, and have students cite examples from the activity materials.

---

Methods used in this brief

• Case Study Analysis
• Fishbowl Discussion
• Think-Pair-Share