Religious discrimination built into seven U.S. state constitutions

Summary

The U.S. Constitution protects religious liberty at the federal level. Article VI provides that no religious test may be required as a qualification for a federal office or public trust. This principle helped distinguish the federal framework from older political systems in which public service could depend on religious conformity.

When several state constitutions were first written, some included language requiring officeholders to acknowledge a deity or affirm a form of religious belief. The wording varied: provisions referred to belief in God, a supreme being, or related concepts. Such requirements could exclude atheists, agnostics and others whose convictions did not fit the specified test.

The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, strengthened national protections against state action that deprives citizens of constitutional rights. Courts later treated religious tests in state constitutions as unenforceable where they conflict with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, even when the original wording was not formally removed.

Historical provisions of this kind have been associated with the constitutions of Arkansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas. The material is best read as a study of constitutional history and the continuing importance of equal civic participation.

Constitutional context

The federal rule and the state provisions developed in different legal settings. Early state documents often reflected the religious assumptions of their era, while the national Constitution adopted a narrower qualification for federal office. Over time, constitutional amendments and court decisions placed state governments under stronger obligations to protect individual rights.

A constitution may retain language that has historical significance even after courts have determined that the provision cannot be enforced. For readers, this distinction matters: the presence of old wording does not by itself establish a valid modern qualification for office.

The states in the historical record

• Arkansas and Maryland: provisions historically connected civic office with belief in a deity or a related religious affirmation.
• Massachusetts, North Carolina and Pennsylvania: constitutional language reflected religious qualifications in different forms and periods.
• South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas: historical clauses similarly raised questions about whether public office could be conditioned on religious belief.

The wording, legal history and present status differ by state. A careful comparison should therefore consult the relevant constitution, amendments and case law rather than treating all provisions as identical.

Further reading in this section

Continue with the overview and the Arkansas and Maryland constitutions, or read about the Massachusetts, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas provisions. The companion essay considers whether atheists may be excluded from public office and reviews two lawsuits: Can atheists be excluded from an office or public trust?

Related perspectives

For broader context, compare this topic with the essays on religious tolerance, human rights, religion and law, atheism and agnosticism.