Prince v. Massachusetts

Mr. Justice Rutledge delivered the opinion of the Court.

The case brings for review another episode in the conflict between Jehovah’s Witnesses and state authority. This time Sarah Prince appeals from convictions for violating Massachusetts’ child labor laws, by acts said to be a rightful exercise of her religious convictions.

When the offenses were committed she was the aunt and custodian of Betty M. Simmons, a girl nine years of age. Originally there were three separate complaints. They [*160] were, shortly, for (1) refusal to disclose Betty’s identity and age to a public officer whose duty was to enforce the statutes; (2) furnishing her with magazines, knowing she was to sell them unlawfully, that is, on the street; and (3) as Betty’s custodian, permitting her to work contrary to law. The complaints were made, respectively, pursuant to §§ 79, 80 and 81 of Chapter 149, Gen. Laws of Mass. (Ter. Ed.). The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the conviction under the first complaint on state grounds;[1] but sustained the judgments founded on the other two.[2] 313 Mass. 223, 46 N. E. 2d 755. They present the only questions for our decision. These are whether §§80 and 81, as applied, contravene the Fourteenth Amendment by denying or abridging appellant’s freedom of religion and by denying to her the equal protection of the laws.