Between 1963 and 1990, which standard of review was used by the Court to evaluate free exercise claims?
Free exercise of what? Speech? Gun rights? Religion?
I assume you mean free exercise of religion. This should clarify the Supreme Court's history on the issue, including current arguments and standards:
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/free-exercise-clause
To determine which standard of review was used by the Court to evaluate free exercise claims between 1963 and 1990, we need to examine the relevant Supreme Court cases from that time period. The standard of review refers to the level of scrutiny the Court applies when evaluating the constitutionality of a law or government action.
During this time period, the Supreme Court had a series of notable cases related to free exercise claims, most notably Sherbert v. Verner (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972). These cases dealt with religious liberty and the rights of individuals to exercise their religion freely.
In Sherbert v. Verner, the Court applied the "strict scrutiny" standard, which is the highest level of scrutiny. This standard requires the government to demonstrate a compelling interest in infringing on an individual's religious exercise and to show that the chosen means are narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.
Following Sherbert, the Court faced another free exercise case, Wisconsin v. Yoder, which involved the rights of Amish parents to exempt their children from attending school beyond the eighth grade due to religious beliefs. In this case, the Court applied a slightly lower standard of review called "strict review," also known as "sword and shield." Under this standard, the government must justify any burden on religious exercise by showing a compelling interest, and the regulation must be the least restrictive means of achieving that interest.
It's worth noting that in 1990, the Supreme Court issued a significant ruling on the standard of review for free exercise claims in Employment Division v. Smith. In this case, the Court held that neutral laws of general applicability that incidentally burden religion are subject to a lower standard of review called the "rational basis" test. Under this standard, the law is upheld if it is rationally related to a legitimate government interest, even if it burdens religious exercise.
In summary, between 1963 and 1990, the standard of review used by the Court to evaluate free exercise claims was primarily the strict scrutiny standard as established in Sherbert v. Verner. However, there were also instances of slightly lower standards, such as strict scrutiny in Wisconsin v. Yoder.