Category talk:Mormonism and law

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mormonism and law category.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Latter Day Saint movementWikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementTemplate:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementLatter Day Saint movement articles

Missing articles for this category

The following articles which would properly fit in that category are currently missing:

Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890) - Supreme Court ruling which upheld a ban of all members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from voting in the Idaho Territory.
Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15 (1885) - Supreme Court ruling which held that Edmunds Act statute was not ex post facto because convicts were charged for their continued cohabitation, not for the prior illegal marriage

Anyone have anymore? -- 12.106.111.10 23:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miles v. United States, 103 U.S. 304 (1880)
In re Snow or Ex parte Snow, 120 U.S. 274 (1887)
In re Nielsen or Ex parte Nielsen, 131 U.S. 176 (1889)

Clawson v. United States, 114 U.S. 477 (1885) text
Cannon v. United States, 116 U.S. 55 {1885} text
Cannon v. United States, 118 U.S. 355 {1886} text
Snow v. United States, 118 U.S. 346 {1886} text
Bassett v. United States, 137 U.S. 496 (1890) text

-- 65.101.29.133 04:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For ownership of the Temple Lot:

Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints v. Church of Christ, 60 F. 937 (W.D. Mo. 1894)
Church of Christ in Missouri v. Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 70 F. 179 (8th Cir. 1895)

-- 12.106.111.10 18:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a couple more modern ones:

Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints v. Amos, 483 U.S. 327 (1987)
Davis v. United States, 495 U.S. 472 (1990)

--12.106.111.10 21:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following are mostly modern polygamy related cases:

Cleveland v. United States, 329 U.S. 14 (1946)
In re Black, 283 P.2d 887 (Utah 1955)
Potter v. Murray City, 585 F.Supp. 1126 (D. Utah 1984), aff’d, 760 F.2d 1065 (10th Cir. 1985)
Cf. Barlow v. Blackburn, 798 P.2d 1360, 1367 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990)
Johanson v. Fischer, 808 P.2d 1083 (Utah 1991)
Barlow v. Evans, 993 F.Supp. 1390 (D. Utah 1997)

Also, of note is that many/most of these would also fit under Category:United States First Amendment case law -- 12.106.111.10 22:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great list. I'm actually surprised we don't have Davis v. Beason or Ramsey, and Amos is a very important Establishment Clause case. I might work on some of these. Cool Hand Luke 04:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]