Browse Arkansas Code titles and sections
42 U.S.C. § 1996a — Traditional Indian religious use of peyote
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Congressional findings and declarations** The Congress finds and declares that—
(1) for many Indian people, the traditional ceremonial use of the peyote cactus as a religious sacrament has for centuries been integral to a way of life, and significant in perpetuating Indian tribes and cultures;
(2) since 1965, this ceremonial use of peyote by Indians has been protected by Federal regulation;
(3) while at least 28 States have enacted laws which are similar to, or are in conformance with, the Federal regulation which protects the ceremonial use of peyote by Indian religious practitioners, 22 States have not done so, and this lack of uniformity has created hardship for Indian people who participate in such religious ceremonies;
(4) the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), held that the First Amendment does not protect Indian practitioners who use peyote in Indian religious ceremonies, and also raised uncertainty whether this religious practice would be protected under the compelling State interest standard; and
(5) the lack of adequate and clear legal protection for the religious use of peyote by Indians may serve to stigmatize and marginalize Indian tribes and cultures, and increase the risk that they will be exposed to discriminatory treatment.
**(b) Use, possession, or transportation of peyote**
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the use, possession, or transportation of peyote by an Indian for bona fide traditional ceremonial purposes in connection with the practice of a traditional Indian religion is lawful, and shall not be prohibited by the United States or any State. No Indian shall be penalized or discriminated against on the basis of such use, possession or transportation, i
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1996a
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. A text match is a research starting point; applicability is not established.
Original supplied file — preserved unchanged
Download original Markdown file
File SHA-256: ed134aa9c54090fbce54816d80bf551f926ef1bd8a442fc1853aa22967e5f7e8. The original may include catalog metadata, neighboring provisions, or embedded records outside this collection's scope. Search shows only the selected federal record. Historical editions and unverified snapshots are not a statement of current law.
Authority boundary: historical or unconfirmed source not current law verified.
Open the recorded source website ↗
Record provenance
Stable record: federal_law:legal_authorities:record_usc_c0b353e56fb0567d48025e52
Source file: Laws/federal/codes/united-states-code/title-42/section-1996a-traditional-indian-religious-use-of-peyote--e4d7abaeba.md
Pages: Not recorded – Not recorded
Passage SHA-256: 5fe12db2d3285496c936df2c6e68d121e3ebd8822d023d2b64f0d7ba51a24dba
Source location: Title 42, Chapter 21, § 1996a; chapter-021-civil-rights.md
Stored source content
**(a) Congressional findings and declarations** The Congress finds and declares that—
(1) for many Indian people, the traditional ceremonial use of the peyote cactus as a religious sacrament has for centuries been integral to a way of life, and significant in perpetuating Indian tribes and cultures;
(2) since 1965, this ceremonial use of peyote by Indians has been protected by Federal regulation;
(3) while at least 28 States have enacted laws which are similar to, or are in conformance with, the Federal regulation which protects the ceremonial use of peyote by Indian religious practitioners, 22 States have not done so, and this lack of uniformity has created hardship for Indian people who participate in such religious ceremonies;
(4) the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), held that the First Amendment does not protect Indian practitioners who use peyote in Indian religious ceremonies, and also raised uncertainty whether this religious practice would be protected under the compelling State interest standard; and
(5) the lack of adequate and clear legal protection for the religious use of peyote by Indians may serve to stigmatize and marginalize Indian tribes and cultures, and increase the risk that they will be exposed to discriminatory treatment.
**(b) Use, possession, or transportation of peyote**
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the use, possession, or transportation of peyote by an Indian for bona fide traditional ceremonial purposes in connection with the practice of a traditional Indian religion is lawful, and shall not be prohibited by the United States or any State. No Indian shall be penalized or discriminated against on the basis of such use, possession or transportation, including, but not limited to, denial of otherwise applicable benefits under public assistance programs.
(2) This section does not prohibit such reasonable regulation and registration by the Drug Enforcement Administration of those persons who cultivate, harvest, or distribute peyote as may be consistent with the purposes of this section and [section 1996 of this title](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section1996&num=0&edition=prelim).
(3) This section does not prohibit application of the provisions of section 481.111(a) of Vernon’s Texas Health and Safety Code Annotated, in effect on October 6, 1994, insofar as those provisions pertain to the cultivation, harvest, and distribution of peyote.
(4) Nothing in this section shall prohibit any Federal department or agency, in carrying out its statutory responsibilities and functions, from promulgating regulations establishing reasonable limitations on the use or ingestion of peyote prior to or during the performance of duties by sworn law enforcement officers or personnel directly involved in public transportation or any other safety-sensitive positions where the performance of such duties may be adversely affected by such use or ingestion. Such regulations shall be adopted only after consultation with representatives of traditional Indian religions for which the sacramental use of peyote is integral to their practice. Any regulation promulgated pursuant to this section shall be subject to the balancing test set forth in section 3 of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (Public Law 103–141; [42 U.S.C. 2000bb–1](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section2000bb-1&num=0&edition=prelim)).
(5) This section shall not be construed as requiring prison authorities to permit, nor shall it be construed to prohibit prison authorities from permitting, access to peyote by Indians while incarcerated within Federal or State prison facilities.
(6) Subject to the provisions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (Public Law 103–141; [42 U.S.C. 2000bb–1](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section2000bb-1&num=0&edition=prelim)) [[42 U.S.C. 2000bb](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section2000bb&num=0&edition=prelim) et seq.], this section shall not be construed to prohibit States from enacting or enforcing reasonable traffic safety laws or regulations.
(7) Subject to the provisions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (Public Law 103–141; [42 U.S.C. 2000bb–1](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section2000bb-1&num=0&edition=prelim)), this section does not prohibit the Secretary of Defense from promulgating regulations establishing reasonable limitations on the use, possession, transportation, or distribution of peyote to promote military readiness, safety, or compliance with international law or laws of other countries. Such regulations shall be adopted only after consultation with representatives of traditional Indian religions for which the sacramental use of peyote is integral to their practice.
**(c) Definitions** For purposes of this section—
(1) the term “Indian” means a member of an Indian tribe;
(2) the term “Indian tribe” means any tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group or community of Indians, including any Alaska Native village (as defined in, or established pursuant to, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act ([43 U.S.C. 1601](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title43-section1601&num=0&edition=prelim) et seq.)), which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians;
(3) the term “Indian religion” means any religion—
(A) which is practiced by Indians, and
(B) the origin and interpretation of which is from within a traditional Indian culture or community; and
(4) the term “State” means any State of the United States, and any political subdivision thereof.
**(d) Protection of rights of Indians and Indian tribes** Nothing in this section shall be construed as abrogating, diminishing, or otherwise affecting—
(1) the inherent rights of any Indian tribe;
(2) the rights, express or implicit, of any Indian tribe which exist under treaties, Executive orders, and laws of the United States;
(3) the inherent right of Indians to practice their religions; and
(4) the right of Indians to practice their religions under any Federal or State law.
Cross-references
Connections may be documented source relationships, shared citations or nearby passages. Each explains its basis; a connection alone does not establish applicability to your situation.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
On and after August 11, 1978, it shall be the policy of the United States to protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express, and exercise the traditional religions of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians, including but not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1996
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
Congress finds and declares that—
**(a)** there is an immediate need for a fair and just settlement of all claims by Natives and Native groups of Alaska, based on aboriginal land claims;
**(b)** the settlement should be accomplished rapidly, with certainty, in conformity with the real economic and social needs of Natives, without litigation, with maximum participation by Natives in decisions affecting their rights and property, without establishing any permanent racially defined institutions, rights, privileges, or obligations, without creating a reservation system or lengthy wardship or trusteeship, and without adding to the categories of property and institutions enjoying special tax privileges or to the legislation establishing special relationships between the United States Government and the State of Alaska;
**(c)** no provision of this chapter shall replace or diminish any right, privilege, or obligation of Natives as citizens of the United States or of Alaska, or relieve, replace, or diminish any obligation of the United States or of the State or 11 So in original. Probably should be “of”. Alaska to protect and promote the rights or welfare of Natives as citizens of the United States or of Alaska; the Secretary is authorized and directed, together with other appropriate agencies of the United States Government, to make a study of all Federal programs primarily designed to benefit Native people and to report back to the Congress with his recommendations for the future management and operation of these programs within three years of December 18, 1971;
**(d)** no provision of this chapter shall constitute a precedent for reopening, renegotiating, or legislating upon any past settlement involving land claims or other matters with any Native organizations, or any
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 43 U.S.C. § 1601
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Findings** The Congress finds that—
(1) the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) laws “neutral” toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise;
(3) governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification;
(4) in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and
(5) the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests.
**(b) Purposes** The purposes of this chapter are—
(1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and
(2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
Page 5242
TITLE 42—THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
§ 1996a
this order be construed to impair enforceable rights to
use of Federal lands that have been granted to third
parties through final agency action. For purposes of
this order, ‘‘agency action’’ has the same meaning as in
the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551(13)).
SEC. 4. This order is intended only to improve the in-
ternal management of the executive branch and is not
intended to, nor does it, create any right, benefit, or
trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforce-
able at law or equity by any party against the United
States, its agencies, officers, or any person.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON.
§ 1996a. Traditional Indian religious use of pe-
yote
(a) Congressional findings and declarations
The Congress finds and declares that—
(1) for many Indian people, the traditional
ceremonial use of the peyote cactus as a reli-
gious sacrament has for centuries been inte-
gral to a way of life, and significant in perpet-
uating Indian tribes and cultures;
(2) since 1965, this ceremonial use of peyote
by Indians has been protected by Federal regu-
lation;
(3) while at least 28 States have enacted laws
which are similar to, or are in conformance
with, the Federal regulation which protects
the ceremonial use of peyote by Indian reli-
gious practitioners, 22 States have not done
so, and this lack of uniformity has created
hardship for Indian people who participate in
such religious ceremonies;
(4) the Supreme Court of the United States,
in the case of Employment Division v. Smith,
494 U.S. 872 (1990), held that the First Amend-
ment does not protect Indian practitioners
who use peyote in Indian religious ceremonies,
and also raised uncertainty whether this reli-
gious practice would be pr
Source: Supplied 2024 U.S. Code historical extraction · 42 U.S.C. § 1996a
Stored review status: historical_2024_not_currentness_verified. Same stored citation; legal effect and authority still require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
Page 5319
TITLE 42—THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
§ 2000bb
(2) a requirement that the least intrusive
method or means of obtaining such materials
be used which do not substantially jeopardize
the availability or usefulness of the materials
sought to be obtained;
(3) a recognition of special concern for pri-
vacy interests in cases in which a search or
seizure for such documents would intrude upon
a known confidential relationship such as that
which may exist between clergyman and pa-
rishioner; lawyer and client; or doctor and pa-
tient; and
(4) a requirement that an application for a
warrant to conduct a search governed by this
subchapter be approved by an attorney for the
government, except that in an emergency situ-
ation the application may be approved by an-
other appropriate supervisory official if within
24 hours of such emergency the appropriate
United States Attorney is notified.
(b) Use of search warrants; reports to Congress
The Attorney General shall collect and com-
pile information on, and report annually to the
Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on the use of
search warrants by Federal officers and employ-
ees for documentary materials described in sub-
section (a)(3).
(Pub. L. 96–440, title II, § 201, Oct. 13, 1980, 94
Stat. 1882.)
§ 2000aa–12. Binding nature of guidelines; dis-
ciplinary actions for violations; legal pro-
ceedings for non-compliance prohibited
Guidelines issued by the Attorney General
under this subchapter shall have the full force
and effect of Department of Justice regulations
and any violation of these guidelines shall make
the employee or officer involved subject to ap-
propriate administrative disciplinary action.
However, an issue relating to the compliance, or
t
Source: Supplied 2024 U.S. Code historical extraction · 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb
Stored review status: historical_2024_not_currentness_verified. The source passage cites 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb. This identifies an authority to review, not proof of applicability.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
Page 434
TITLE 43—PUBLIC LANDS
§ 1600l
1 So in original. Probably should be ‘‘of’’.
§ 1600l. Authorization of appropriations
There is authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of the Interior $600,000, through the
end of fiscal year 1990, in addition to any other
funds now available to the Department to dis-
charge its duties to implement sections 1600b to
1600k of this title and section 4029 of title 42:
Provided, That by mutual agreement, such funds
shall be made available to the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency to discharge its du-
ties under section 4029 of title 42: Provided fur-
ther, That the provisions of sections 1600d and
1600e of this title shall not be affected by this
section: And Provided further, in addition, Indian
tribes may be eligible under Public Law 93–638
[25 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.] to contract for studies of
Indian lands required under the provisions of
this chapter.
(Pub. L. 99–450, § 15, Oct. 8, 1986, 100 Stat. 1136.)
Editorial Notes
REFERENCES IN TEXT
Public Law 93–638, referred to in text, is Pub. L.
93–638, Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2203, known as the Indian
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act,
which is classified principally to chapter 46 (§ 5301 et
seq.) of Title 25, Indians. For complete classification of
this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under
section 5301 of Title 25 and Tables.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS
For transfer of all functions, personnel, assets, com-
ponents, authorities, grant programs, and liabilities of
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, including
the functions of the Under Secretary for Federal Emer-
gency Management relating thereto, to the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, see section 315(a)(1)
of Title 6, Domestic
Source: Supplied 2024 U.S. Code historical extraction · 43 U.S.C. § 1601
Stored review status: historical_2024_not_currentness_verified. The source passage cites 43 U.S.C. § 1601. This identifies an authority to review, not proof of applicability.