InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

Braunfeld et al. v. Brown, Commissioner of Police of Philadelphia, et al.

In a 6–3 decision, the Court held that a Pennsylvania blue law forbidding the sale of various retail products on Sunday was not an unconstitutional interference with religion as described in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

366 U.S. 599 · No. 67 · 1960 term · Warren Court

Decided May 29, 1961 · argued Dec 8, 1960

First Amendment · Free exercise of religion

Landmark · Freedom of religion

Majority opinion: Earl Warren

The voteMajorityDissent

5–45 in the majority, 4 in dissent

4 dissents (5–4)

Affirmed. Braunfeld et al. lost.

What this ruling means

Affirmed: the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Pennsylvania Eastern U.S. District Court, so it stands (sometimes with changes the Court made to it).

Braunfeld et al. was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Lost” means the Court did not give that side the result it asked for.

From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.

Report a correction

Summary

The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.

Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599 (1961), was a landmark case on the issue of religious and economic liberty decided by the United States Supreme Court. In a 6–3 decision, the Court held that a Pennsylvania blue law forbidding the sale of various retail products on Sunday was not an unconstitutional interference with religion as described in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Read the full article on Wikipedia

Data notes

The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1960 term. Filled: the 5 in the majority. Hollow: the 4 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianDouglasBlackWarrenBrennanStewartClarkWhittakerFrankfurterHarlan

Majority(5)

Dissent(4)

Data notes

Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.

Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
Braunfeld et al.Retail business or outlet
Respondent
Brown, Commissioner of Police of Philadelphia, et al.State (Pennsylvania)
Reached the Court by
Appeal (the Court was required to hear it)
Data notes

The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Provision
Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
Kind of law
Constitutional Amendment
Decided by
Judicial review (state level)
Data notes

The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. May 29, 1961DecidedDecided · Decided 5–4: affirmed. Braunfeld et al. lost.
  2. Dec 8, 1960ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  3. Not datedTaken upTaken up · Reached the Supreme Court on appeal, which the Court had to hear.
  4. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Began in and was decided by the Pennsylvania Eastern U.S. District Court: petition denied or appeal dismissed.
Data notes

From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

42 other argued cases since 1946 on free exercise of religion, newest first.

  1. Mahmoud v. TaylorLandmark145 S. Ct. 2332Jun 27, 2025 · 145 S. Ct. 2332First Amendment6–36–3 band

  2. Ramirez v. Collier142 S. Ct. 1264Mar 24, 2022 · 142 S. Ct. 1264First Amendment8–18–1 band
  3. Tanzin v. Tanvir141 S. Ct. 486Dec 10, 2020 · 141 S. Ct. 486First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  4. Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru140 S. Ct. 2049Jul 8, 2020 · 140 S. Ct. 2049First Amendment7–27–2 band

  5. Zubik v. Burwell578 U.S. 403May 16, 2016 · 578 U.S. 403First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  6. Holt v. Hobbs574 U.S. 352Jan 20, 2015 · 574 U.S. 352First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  7. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby StoresLandmark · Freedom of religion573 U.S. 682Jun 30, 2014 · 573 U.S. 682First Amendment5–45–4 band

  8. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion565 U.S. 171Jan 11, 2012 · 565 U.S. 171First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  9. Christian Legal Society Chapter of the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, aka Hastings Christian Fellowship v. Leo P. Martinez et al.561 U.S. 661Jun 28, 2010 · 561 U.S. 661First Amendment5–45–4 band

  10. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, et al. v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao Do Vegetal et al.546 U.S. 418Feb 21, 2006 · 546 U.S. 418First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  11. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., et al. v. Village of Stratton et al.536 U.S. 150Jun 17, 2002 · 536 U.S. 150First Amendment8–18–1 band

  12. City of Boerne v. P. F. Flores, Archbishop of San Antonio, and United StatesLandmark · Power of Congress to enforce civil rights521 U.S. 507Jun 25, 1997 · 521 U.S. 507First Amendment6–36–3 band

  13. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. and Ernesto Pichardo v. City of HialeahLandmark · Freedom of religion508 U.S. 520Jun 11, 1993 · 508 U.S. 520First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  14. Lamb's Chapel and John Steigerwald v. Center Moriches Union Free School District et al.508 U.S. 384Jun 7, 1993 · 508 U.S. 384First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  15. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon, et al. v. Smith et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion494 U.S. 872Apr 17, 1990 · 494 U.S. 872First Amendment6–36–3 band

  16. Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. Board of Equalization of California493 U.S. 378Jan 17, 1990 · 493 U.S. 378First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  17. Frazee v. Illinois Department of Employment Security et al.489 U.S. 829Mar 29, 1989 · 489 U.S. 829First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  18. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of the State of Oregon, et al. v. Smith485 U.S. 660Apr 27, 1988 · 485 U.S. 660First Amendment5–36–3 band
  19. Richard E. Lyng, Secretary of Agriculture, et al. v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association et al.Landmark · Native American law485 U.S. 439Apr 19, 1988 · 485 U.S. 439First Amendment5–36–3 band

  20. O'Lone, Administrator, Leesburg Prison Complex, et al. v. Estate of Shabazz et al.482 U.S. 342Jun 9, 1987 · 482 U.S. 342First Amendment5–45–4 band

  21. Hobbie v. Unemployment Appeals Commission of Florida et al.480 U.S. 136Feb 25, 1987 · 480 U.S. 136First Amendment8–18–1 band
  22. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Roy et al.476 U.S. 693Jun 11, 1986 · 476 U.S. 693First Amendment8–18–1 band

  23. Goldman v. Weinberger, Secretary of Defense, et al.475 U.S. 503Mar 25, 1986 · 475 U.S. 503First Amendment5–45–4 band

  24. Jensen, Director, Department of Motor Vehicles of Nebraska, et al. v. Quaring472 U.S. 478Jun 17, 1985 · 472 U.S. 478First Amendment4–45–4 band
  25. United States v. Lee455 U.S. 252Feb 23, 1982 · 455 U.S. 252First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  26. Heffron, Secretary and Manager of the Minnesota State Agricultural Society Board of Managers, et al. v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., et al.452 U.S. 640Jun 22, 1981 · 452 U.S. 640First Amendment5–45–4 band

  27. Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division et al.450 U.S. 707Apr 6, 1981 · 450 U.S. 707First Amendment8–18–1 band

  28. Jones et al. v. Wolf et al.443 U.S. 595Jul 2, 1979 · 443 U.S. 595First Amendment5–45–4 band
  29. McDaniel v. Paty et al.435 U.S. 618Apr 19, 1978 · 435 U.S. 618First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  30. Wooley, Chief of Police of Lebanon, et al. v. Maynard et ux.430 U.S. 705Apr 20, 1977 · 430 U.S. 705First Amendment6–36–3 band

  31. Parker Seal Co. v. Cummins429 U.S. 65Nov 2, 1976 · 429 U.S. 65First Amendment4–45–4 band
  32. Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese for the United States of America and Canada et al. v. Milivojevich et al.426 U.S. 696Jun 21, 1976 · 426 U.S. 696First Amendment7–27–2 band
  33. Wisconsin v. Yoder et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion406 U.S. 205May 15, 1972 · 406 U.S. 205First Amendment7–0Unanimous band

  34. Dewey v. Reynolds Metals Co.402 U.S. 689Jun 1, 1971 · 402 U.S. 689First Amendment4–45–4 band
  35. Presbyterian Church in the United States et al. v. Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Memorial Presbyterian Church et al.393 U.S. 440Jan 27, 1969 · 393 U.S. 440First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  36. Sherbert v. Verner et al., Members of South Carolina Employment Security Commission, et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion374 U.S. 398Jun 17, 1963 · 374 U.S. 398First Amendment7–27–2 band

  37. Gallagher, Chief of Police of Springfield, Massachusetts, et al. v. Crown Kosher Super Market of Massachusetts, Inc., et al.366 U.S. 617May 29, 1961 · 366 U.S. 617First Amendment6–36–3 band

  38. Poulos v. New Hampshire345 U.S. 395Apr 27, 1953 · 345 U.S. 395First Amendment7–27–2 band

  39. Fowler v. Rhode Island345 U.S. 67Mar 9, 1953 · 345 U.S. 67First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  40. Kedroff et al. v. Saint Nicholas Cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church in North America344 U.S. 94Nov 24, 1952 · 344 U.S. 94First Amendment8–18–1 band
  41. Kunz v. New YorkLandmark · Freedom of religion340 U.S. 290Jan 15, 1951 · 340 U.S. 290First Amendment8–18–1 band

  42. Niemotko v. Maryland340 U.S. 268Jan 15, 1951 · 340 U.S. 268First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

Data notes

Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.

Report a correction

Official record

Read the full opinion on Justia, the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.