Editing No Religious Test Clause (section)

==State law==
[[File:Religious qualifications for public office in the United States.svg|400px|thumb|{{Legend|#002255|States that have religious qualifications for public office written in their constitutions}}
{{Legend|#D3D3D3|States that do not have religious qualifications for public office written in their constitutions}}]] 
{{See also|Religious qualifications for public office in the United States|Religion in the United States}}
Earlier in [[History of the United States|U.S. history]], the doctrine of [[states' rights]] allowed individual states complete discretion regarding the inclusion of a religious test in their [[State constitution (United States)|state constitutions]]. In 1961 such religious tests by the states were deemed to be [[Constitutionality|unconstitutional]] by the extension of the First Amendment provisions to the states (via the [[Incorporation of the Bill of Rights|incorporation]] of the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|14th Amendment]]). In the 1961 case ''[[Torcaso v. Watkins]]'', the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that such language in state constitutions was in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.<ref name = Berkley>{{cite web|url=https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/cases/torcaso-v-watkins|title=Torcaso v. Watkins|work=Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs|publisher=Georgetown University|access-date=25 May 2019}}</ref> Citing the Supreme Court's interpretation of the [[Establishment Clause]] in ''[[Everson v. Board of Education]]'' and linking it to ''Torcaso v. Watkins,'' Justice [[Hugo Black]] stated for the Court:

<blockquote>We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs.</blockquote>

The Supreme Court did not rule on the applicability of Article VI, stating that "Because we are reversing the judgment on other grounds, we find it unnecessary to consider appellant's contention that this provision applies to state as well as federal offices." 

Eight states include language in their constitutions either requiring state officeholders to have particular religious beliefs or specifically protecting those who do. However, the requirements are unenforceable because of the 1961 Supreme Court decision. The states are:
#[[Arkansas]] (Article 19 Section 1)
#[[Maryland]] (Declaration of Rights, Article 37)
#[[Mississippi]] (Article 14, Section 265)
#[[North Carolina]] (Article 6 Section 8)
#[[Pennsylvania]] (Article 1 Section 4)<br>Specifically protects officeholders with religious belief but is silent on whether those without such beliefs are also protected.<ref name=StateConst>{{cite web |url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/texas.htm |title=Religious discrimination in state constitutions |publisher=Religioustolerance.org |access-date=2008-09-06}}</ref> The required beliefs include belief in a Supreme Being, and belief in a future state of rewards and punishments.
#[[South Carolina]] (Article 17 Section 4)
#[[Tennessee]] (Article 9 Section 2)
#[[Texas]] (Article 1 Section 4)

Some of these same states also specify that the oath of office include the words "[[so help me God]]". In some cases, these beliefs (or oaths) were historically required also of jurors, witnesses in court, [[Notary public|notaries public]], and state employees. In the 1997 case of ''[[Silverman v. Campbell]]'',<ref>486 SE.2d 1, 326 S.C. 208 (1997)</ref> the [[South Carolina Supreme Court]] ruled that the state constitution requiring an oath to God for employment in the public sector violated Article VI of the federal constitution, as well as the First and Fourteenth Amendments and therefore could not be enforced.<ref>486 SE.2d 1, 326 S.C. 208 (1997)</ref>