- 6 -
number for tax purposes, the rationale for the choice was that
most people already had an SSN and thus the use of that pre-
existing number would relieve taxpayers of an additional burden.
See H. Rept. 1103, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. 3 (1961); S. Rept. 1102,
87th Cong., 1st Sess. 3 (1961), 1961-2 C.B. 475.
II. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993
Petitioners assert that requiring them to furnish SSN’s for
their children as a condition to obtaining the dependency
exemptions is an unconstitutional intrusion on the free exercise
of their religion. The First Amendment to the Constitution
provides, in relevant part, that: “Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof.” (Emphasis added.)
In Bowen v. Roy, 476 U.S. 693 (1986), the Supreme Court
considered whether a Federal statute requiring applicants for
Federal welfare assistance to obtain and furnish SSN’s for their
children was constitutional as applied to two Native American
applicants who held a religious belief that the use of the number
would harm their daughter’s spirit. Part III of the opinion of
Chief Justice Burger, joined by two other Justices, rejected the
strict scrutiny test applied by the trial court, concluding that
there is no violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First
3(...continued)
Computer & Info. L. 529 (Spring 1998).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011