Court Cases: USA: Daniel Taylor Jenkins: Second Circuit Appeal:

Amicus Brief of NYYM:

The Brief

I. Identity and Authority of the Amicus

New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (“NYYM”), the organization[1] for the Quaker Meetings in New York, southwestern Connecticut and northern New Jersey, submits this brief, pursuant to Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, as a Friend of the Court in support of the appeal of Petitioner-Appellant Daniel T. Jenkins from the order and decision of the court below granting the motion for summary judgment and for imposition of a penalty under section 6673 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 of Defendant-Appellee Commissioner of Internal Revenue. On April 1, 2006, New York Yearly Meeting approved a minute for New York Yearly Meeting to submit an amicus brief in support of the appeal of Daniel Jenkins's case.[2]

II. Interest of the Amicus

The peace testimony, or living out a commitment to peace, is a central tenet of the Quaker religion. The religion has always required that belief be expressed in action and that action be grounded in belief.  Daniel Jenkins's refusal to pay taxes supporting war is an expression of his peace testimony.

The Religious Society of Friends has a long history, tradition and practice of sincere opposition to warfare founded on deeply held religious beliefs, and, as well, a history of advocating alternatives to violence for settling conflicts.  The Daniel Jenkins case addresses these core Quaker concerns. Daniel Jenkins attends and is supported by a Clearness Committee[3] of the Saranac Lake (New York) Friends Meeting, which is one of the Meetings within New York Yearly Meeting. The filing of this amicus brief is an expression of the Peace Testimony of New York Yearly Meeting and honors the Peace Testimony of Dan Jenkins. New York Yearly Meeting believes that in considering Mr. Jenkins's appeal of the decision of the US Tax Court, the Second Circuit would appreciate a discussion of relevant Quaker beliefs and practices, and of precedents for government recognition of the rights of religious freedom and liberty of conscience.

III. Summary of the Argument

This brief discusses below at IV.A the religious beliefs and actions (faith and practice) of Quakers concerning war and the support of warfare, in IV.B the history of the Quaker peace testimony and witness against war, and in IV.C the history of governmental accommodation of religious beliefs and practices. The argument points out that the Quaker peace testimony began in 1661, and documents the long tradition of faith and practice supporting the peace testimony which continues to the present day. Several occasions where Quakers have pressed government officials for exemptions from both military service and from payment of taxes or fees supporting warfare are documented, beginning in Pennsylvania in the 1750s during the French and Indian War. Examples of how colonial, state, confederation and Federal governments have made statutory acknowledgement of liberty of conscience by accommodating Quaker and other religious beliefs are discussed. The argument concludes by highlighting the profound respect for acts of religious conscience protected by the Ninth Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

IV. Argument

A. War and the Support of War Violate the Quaker Religious Conviction

1. Quaker Theology Opposing War

On April 1, 2006, New York Yearly Meeting approved the following minute:

The Living Spirit works in the world to give life, joy, peace and prosperity through love, integrity and compassionate justice among people. We are united in this Power. We acknowledge that paying for war violates our religious conviction. We will seek ways to witness to this religious conviction in each of our communities [emphasis added].[4]

The minute was approved in the context of a long history of Quaker objection to warfare, based on religious faith and practice. This history of Quaker belief and practice, known as the Quaker peace testimony, began with a 1661 declaration by English Quakers to King Charles I that:

We do utterly deny all outward wars and strife and fightings with outward weapons, for any end or under any pretense whatsoever. And this is our testimony to the whole world... The spirit of Christ, by which we are guided, is not changeable, so as once to command us from a thing as evil and again to move unto it; we do certainly know, and do testify to the world, that the spirit of Christ, which leads us into all Truth, will never more move us to fight and war against any man with outward weapons, neither for the Kingdom of Christ, nor for Kingdoms of this world.[5]

The Quaker understanding of peace comes primarily from the life and ministry of Jesus Christ,[6] who taught his hearers at the Sermon on the Mount not to fight but to love and pray for their enemies.[7] When two disciples urged revenge on Samaritan villages that had refused them hospitality, Jesus rebuked them, saying that he “did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them”.[8] When a party of his enemies came to arrest him and one of the disciples cut off an enemy's ear, Jesus disarmed the defender and healed the ear.[9] Finally, when the priesthood and Roman authorities crucified Jesus, he prayed from the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”[10] To become a member of this Person of Christ is to become incapable of waging war,[11] for wars “come from uncontrolled desires, and the determination to snatch by force what God may not be granting.”[12]

The biblical and theological basis of Quaker conscientious objection to all wars was first documented by Quaker theologian Robert Barclay in 1676. His Apology for the True Christian Divinity gives about forty quotations or references to show that the leaders of the early Christian church opposed participation in war.[13] Barclay wrote that “War is absolutely unlawful for those who would be disciples of Christ. . . Christ says that ‘we should love our enemies’ but war teaches us to hate and destroy them.”[14] Barclay asked how Christians can reconcile Jesus' doctrine of peace with the results of war. Through war,

...the world has become filled with violence, oppression, murder, rape, despoliation, destruction by fire and depredation, as well as all kinds of cruel and lascivious behavior. It is strange that in war men who are made in the image of God can become so depraved, that they resemble animals instead. They become roaring lions, slashing tigers, devouring wolves, and wild boars, rather than rational creatures endowed with the gift of reason.[15]

To turn away from such destructive desires, Quakers believe in turning toward a Power, a “Living Spirit” that “works in the world to give life, joy, peace and prosperity” (minute cited above). George Fox, the founder of the Quaker movement, encountered that Spirit when an inner voice declared to him “There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition.”[16] Fox found that by coming into relationship with Christ, his life was transformed and as a result, the occasion of war had been removed from his life.[17]  When Commonwealth commissioners asked Fox to accept an officer's commission in the militia, he responded:

I told them I lived in the virtue of that life and power that took away the occasion of all wars and I knew from whence all wars did rise, from the lust according to James's doctrine … I told them I was come into the covenant of peace which was before wars and strifes were. [18]

This quotation and the above 1661 declaration to Charles I have been familiar and treasured passages to generations of Quakers. As expressions of the peace testimony, these statements along with Barclay's exposition of pacifism in the Apology formed the foundation for a firm stance of conscientious objection to war as the “established practice of the Society of Friends.”[19]

2. Actions Arising From the Quaker Peace Testimony

For Quakers, beliefs and action are integrated. Friends seek to make real their faith and concerns through personal acts (“witness and testimony”). The peace testimony calls Quakers to personal witness to support the end of warfare and the promotion of nonviolent alternatives for resolving disputes. This is reflected in Advice Number 14 of New York Yearly Meeting's Faith and Practice (at pages 60-61):

Friends are earnestly cautioned against the taking of arms against any person, since “all outward wars and strife and fightings with outward weapons” are contrary to our Christian testimony. Friends should beware of supporting preparations for war even indirectly, and should examine in this light such matters as non-combatant military service, cooperation with conscription, employment or investment in war industries, and voluntary payment of war taxes...

Friends are advised to maintain our testimony against war by endeavoring to exert an influence in favor of peaceful principles and the settlement of all differences by peaceful methods. They should lend support to all that strengthens international friendship and understanding and give active help to movements that substitute cooperation and justice for force and intimidation [emphasis added].

This Advice and the New York Yearly Meeting minute reflect the Quaker understanding that coerced participation in military activities is an affront to the Quaker peace testimony, since “paying for war violates our religious conviction” (see footnote 4) and “we do utterly deny all outward wars and strife and fightings with outward weapons, for any end or under any pretense whatsoever” (see footnote 5). In response to arguments that Quakers as citizens are obligated to pay for war along with other government obligations, Friend Samuel Allinson argued in 1780 that “war was a state closer to anarchy than to government or law, and that all the obligations that a citizen may tacitly incur does not oblige him to support the antithesis of civil society.”[20] He concluded that “if we [Quakers] are forbidden ... .  personally to engage in war ... . we ought not mediately to promote it by actively giving our money to that use.”[21]

NYYM previously registered these concerns in federal court, when it filed two amicus briefs in Packard v. United States, 7 F.Supp. 2d (D. Conn 1998), another case concerning an individual's refusal to pay taxes for military purposes.  Similar actions by Quaker meetings objecting to war are discussed in B2a below.


1. Quakers' witness against war would have been well-recognized by the Framers of the Constitution

Modern Constitutional analysis frequently employs a substantial historical review to discern the probable intent of the Founding Fathers. The Framers of the Constitution, meeting in Philadelphia in 1787, would have been familiar with the beliefs and practices of Quakers, for Philadelphia was not only the capital of the confederated states, but also the major population center of Quakers in North America.[22] The Quakers were well-known not only for their refusals based on religious scruples to serve in military units, but also for refusing to cooperate with requisitions for military use, to the extent of even refusing to sell or to grind grain for George Washington![23] No doubt some of the convention delegates would have recalled the struggle of a generation earlier, during the French and Indian War, when a group of Quakers petitioned the assembly in Philadelphia opposing the raising of funds for that war (below at B2a). They also would have known about the accommodations that states, such as New York, had made to Quakers by granting them exemptions from military service (below at C1). In this context, what would have been the Framers' “original intent” concerning such accommodations of religious beliefs? There was no income tax or universal conscription during that period. After the Revolution, requisitions of troops and materiel were reserved to the state militias and the state militia laws usually provided exemptions to Quakers.[24] The Framers would have known that the federal government would not be collecting taxes for military purposes, or otherwise forcing the population's support of war activities. Rather, the state and confederation governments supported liberty of conscience by accommodating religious beliefs that preclude individuals from participation in war (below at C1 and C2).

2. Expressions of the Peace Testimony

The peace testimony has been expressed in a multitude of ways. The discussion below addresses three of these: refusal to pay taxes supporting military objectives (below at 2a), refusal to participate in military service (at 3a), and provision of humanitarian aid in times of war and promoting peaceful alternatives (at 3b).

a. Refusal To Pay War Taxes

An evolving expression of the peace testimony, known as “tax witness” is the refusal to pay taxes levied and expended for military purposes. For nearly three hundred years Friends have been concerned by the inconsistency of paying for a war effort while refusing to otherwise participate in warfare.[25] Refusal to pay war taxes in the USA was mostly practiced in the historic peace churches until World War II.[26] These churches included the Religious Society of Friends (The Quakers), the Shakers, the Mennonites and the Brethren. The Quakers were opposed to paying for war as long ago as colonial times and during the Revolutionary War (1670s – 1783).[27] For example, in 1755, while the Pennsylvania Assembly was debating raising funds “for the king's use” in the French and Indian War, a delegation of 20 Quakers addressed the Assembly in opposition to the raising of money for the war. They expressed willingness to pay taxes for peaceable purposes, such as “to cultivate our friendship with our Indian neighbors and to support such of our fellow subjects who are or may be in distress”; but with respect to monies destined for war purposes, they warned that “many among us will be under the necessity of suffering rather than consenting thereto by the payment of a tax for such purposes”.[28]

When the bill became law, these Friends published “An Epistle of Tender Love and Caution to Friends in Pennsylvania” to explain the basis for this testimony and to encourage others to follow their faith in refusing to contribute to war taxes:

And being painfully apprehensive that the large sum granted by the late Act of Assembly for the King's use is principally intended for purposes inconsistent with our peaceable testimony, we therefore think that as we cannot be concerned in wars and fightings, so neither ought we to contribute thereto by paying the tax directed by the said Act.[29]

In 1776, during the Revolutionary War, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting approved a minute or statement “that a tax levied for the purchasing of drums, colours, and other warlike purposes, cannot be paid consistent with our Christian testimony.”[30] Similar positions were expressed in opposition to

  1. taxes imposed to retire the debt from the Revolutionary War,
  2. import duties used to finance the War of 1812, and
  3. to a lesser extent, taxes imposed during the Civil War.[31]

In 1821, Quakers in New York State presented a memorial to the state Constitutional Convention requesting an amendment that would exempt Quakers not only from bearing arms, but also “from incurring any fine or penalty in lieu thereof.” [32] The memorial explained that:

The obligation they feel themselves under, not to comply with any military requisitions, nor to pay any equivalent, is founded . . . not only on the doctrines of the Christian religion, but derived from the undeniable dictates and the unalienable rights of conscience, which can neither be communicated nor controlled by human authority; but which belongs essentially to the relation existing between man and his Creator.[33]

In 1841, New York Quakers presented a Memorial and Remonstrance to the State Assembly requesting that members of the Society be exempted from fine or imprisonment for non-performance of military duty (including payment of the militia commutation tax).[34] The Report of the Assembly's Committee on the Militia and Public Defense noted:

That they [the Quakers] have given to the subject such consideration as its importance and the highly respectable character of the memorialists seemed to demand. The memorial contains an eloquent and elaborate defense of the conscientious objections entertained by the Religious Society of Friends in the State of New York, against bearing arms, or in any manner sustaining or countenancing war. [35]

The respect with which the Assembly committee members considered the Quakers' request and the integrity of the memorialists honors the sincerity of Friends' views (see state accommodations of Quaker beliefs below at C).

During the last thirty-five years, Quaker organizations have sought to support individual refusals to pay taxes destined for military purposes. For example, many Friends and Quaker organizations, including New York Yearly Meeting, refused to pay the federal telephone tax imposed to help finance the Vietnam War.[36]  As well, the American Friends Service Committee objected to being compelled to withhold taxes from the wages of Quaker employees who were refusing to pay taxes being used, in part, to fund warfare. See American Friends Service Committee v. United States, 368 F.Supp. 1176 (E.D. Pa. 1973), rev'd on procedural grounds, 419 US 7 (1974)(per curiam). And Philadelphia Yearly Meeting refused to comply with levies on wages of employees who were engaging in war tax protests. See United States v. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, 753 F.Supp. 1300 (E.D. Pa. 1990).  Similarly, New York Yearly Meeting has a recorded minute supporting New York Yearly Meeting staff who choose not to pay a portion of their taxes for reasons of conscience.[37] In addition, in February 1991, Purchase Quarterly Meeting, a constituent meeting of New York Yearly Meeting, established the Peace Tax Escrow Fund utilized by tax witnesses, and continues to administer the Fund. Purchase Monthly Meeting regularly recorded the amount of interest and penalties seized from tax witnesses as a minute of suffering for religious conscience.[38]

Similarly, Northeast Regional Meeting and Saranac Lake Monthly Meeting have actively supported the testimony of Appellant Daniel Jenkins in this case.[39]

3. Other Expressions of the Peace Testimony
a. Conscientious Objection to Military Service

Conscientious objection to military service, as exhibited by Fox's refusal, is the oldest and most familiar expression of Friends' peace testimony. By the middle of the eighteenth century, the absolute refusal of Quakers to fight was so familiar that at least five colonies -- New York, Virginia, Massachusetts, North Carolina and Rhode Island -- allowed Quakers to be exempted from the military service obligatory for other able-bodied males. (Pennsylvania, more heavily Quaker, did not even adopt a military conscription act until 1775).[40] Conscientious objection by Quakers in the United States has continued to be an important expression of the peace testimony in all the major wars, from the Revolution to the present.[41]

b. Humanitarian Actions

Barclay's appeals to human reason against war (above at A1) have been cited as a “strand in their [Quakers'] thinking on war and society that eventually blossomed into the humanitarian relief activity that has become so closely associated with the Quaker name in our (20th) century”.[42] The peace testimony has also led to witness against war by actions reflective of Friends' belief that no human being can be deemed an “enemy”. For example, as they have done in numerous violent conflicts over three centuries, Friends acted to provide medical supplies and other relief assistance to all sides in the Vietnam War and during the more recent struggles in Bosnia, Rwanda and Iraq. Quaker advocacy groups in Washington (Friends Committee on National Legislation) and in New York and Geneva (Quaker United Nations Office) also work actively with Congress and the United Nations to develop alternatives to force and coercion in national and international affairs.[43] 

Other well-known Quaker organizations that seek to pursue and promote non-violent alternatives for the resolution of disputes include the American Friends Service Committee, the Alternatives to Violence Project and Friends Peace Team Project. The peace testimony also finds expression in Friends' work to relieve or overcome poverty, injustice, and other forms of suffering, which are among the causes of war.[44] It was work of this sort that was the primary basis for the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to the Religious Society of Friends in 1947.[45]

4. Conclusion

All the various expressions of the peace testimony find their roots and inspiration in the conviction that the spirit of God dwells in each person, and that the calling of Friends is to listen and speak to that of God in others, thereby strengthening that of God within themselves. There are, of course, conflicts and disputes, and we all must struggle with evil. But in such struggles, Friends' only weapons are love, gentleness, faith, patience, purity, grace, virtue, temperance, self-denial, meekness and innocence. The war tax witness of Appellant Daniel Jenkins profoundly reflects these core Quaker religious beliefs.

C. Religious Beliefs and Practices have been Repeatedly Accommodated by Governments in the Past

The lengthy history of governmental accommodation of the religious beliefs and practices of Friends and other faith communities began in the pre-Revolutionary era. Those discussed below include exemptions from military service and from paying taxes levied for military purposes, and exemption of the Amish from paying social security taxes.

1. Exemption from Military Service

Quaker opposition to military service was recognized and accommodated even during the American Colonial and Revolutionary War eras, and exemptions from military service on grounds of religious conscience have been continued to the present.

The 1683 Constitution for the Province of East New Jersey  had a provision that “no man that declares he cannot for conscience sake bear arms … shall be at any time put upon so doing in his own person, nor yet upon sending any to serve in his stead.”[46]By the militia law passed in the Colony of New York in 1755, Quakers and members of the United Brethren (Moravians) were exempted from bearing arms or doing military service. [47]  As noted above (at page 13), at least four other colonies -- Virginia, Massachusetts, North Carolina and Rhode Island -- also exempted Quakers from military service.[48] During the Revolutionary War, both the Continental Congress and colonial governments afforded exemption from military service for Quakers and other religious conscientious objectors.[49] These exemptions generally were continued by state governments until the demise of the state militia system in the 1850s.[50]  The New York State Constitution of 1777 specifically mentioned Quakers and included the right to refuse to bear arms due to religious scruples.[51]

On the Federal level, conscientious objection to military service has long received governmental recognition.[52] When the first federal universal military service draft was enacted during the Civil War, Congress adopted acts in March, 1863 and February, 1864 exempting from service “members of religious denominations, who shall by oath or affirmation declare that they are conscientiously opposed to the bearing of arms, and who are prohibited from doing so by the rules and articles of faith and practice of said religious denominations...”[53] Every subsequent draft law has included various exemptions for persons whose religious conscience precluded their accepting military service.[54]

2. Exemptions From Paying Taxes for Military Purposes.

Colonial and later state governments, starting in 1683, provided exemptions from paying taxes or contributions levied for military purposes to persons whose religious scruples preventing them from making such payments. The East New Jersey Constitution had the following provisions:

... none of the Proprietors and other inhabitants may be forced to contribute any money for the use of arms, to which conscience sake they have not the freedom... [but] shall on the other hand bear so much in other charges, as may make up that portion in the general charge of the Province.[55]

Quakers persistently petitioned New York authorities for exemptions from paying taxes or commutation fees levied for military purposes. This resulted in New York providing sometime before 1841 that militia commutation taxes not be used for military purposes, but rather be paid into county treasuries, as noted in the New York Assembly Militia and Public Defense Committee report responding to the 1841 Memorial and Remonstrance (see IV.B2a above).   The Committee report noted that the state law at that time not only relieved ... “. every person conscientiously averse to bearing arms…”, but also “…from all liability to contribute, even indirectly, to military purposes.”[56] Similarly, Congress during the Civil War specifically accommodated Quaker conscientious objections to the payment of “war taxes” by providing that the commutation fee to be paid for exemption from military service was to be applied solely to humanitarian purposes.[57]  These two examples represent significant statutory acknowledgements by state and Federal authorities of the need to accommodate liberty of conscience.

The success of such prior governmental accommodation of Quaker testimonies demonstrates that providing exemptions from military requisitions to accommodate religious beliefs need not result in imposition of a burden in the administration of taxes.

3. Religious accommodation need not burden the administration of taxation

As indicated by the examples above, the federal income tax can be administered so as to accommodate the peace testimony. For example, in 1972, legislation was introduced to create a Peace Tax Fund, to permit conscientious objectors to direct the portion of their taxes normally spent for military purposes to non-military programs. Peace Tax Fund legislation has been introduced in every Congress since then.[58] New York Yearly Meeting supports the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund and appoints representatives to serve on its national board.[59] 

4. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act supports accommodation

Religious Freedom Restoration Act's mandate to utilize “the least restrictive means”[60] would appear to support the accommodation of Quaker belief in this circumstance. If the Federal Government during the Civil War was able to accommodate the Quaker peace testimony by allocating commutation fees to humanitarian purposes, and the Internal Revenue Service today is able to administer the voluntary campaign finance check-off without suffering undue burden, surely Daniel Jenkins's tax witness may be accommodated pursuant to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

5. Exemption of Amish From Paying Social Security Tax

Since 1965, the federal government has accommodated members of the Amish sect who refuse to pay Social Security taxes due to religious scruples against insurance. The dispute came to the public's attention after government agents seized the horses of a Pennsylvania Amishman, Valentine Byler, to pay for the back Social Security taxes he had refused to pay.[61] After adverse publicity, officials determined that the Amish could seek an exemption from paying the tax based on First Amendment rights. The Internal Revenue Service established a moratorium on forced levies and seizures of Amish property; and the US Congress in 1965 passed legislation exempting the Amish from paying taxes into the Social Security system.[62] The conscientious objections of individual Amish farmers were thus acknowledged and accommodated by the federal government. This Amish tax exemption creates a precedent for other individual taxpayers who also have sincere conscientious objections to paying income taxes which are used by the government in ways that violate other long-standing religious traditions and moral beliefs.

6. Conclusion

The long history of multifaceted governmental accommodation of Friends' and other religious communities' practices reflects the profound respect for acts of religious conscience protected from disparagement by the Ninth Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Because accommodation entails modification of rules or requirements of general application, requests for accommodation always appear burdensome or unmanageable to the magistrate or administrator saddled with responsibility for executing a law. But the nearly three hundred years of history of government accommodation cited above shows that it can be done.

V. Conclusion

For all the foregoing reasons, together with those set forth in the briefs of Petitioner-Appellant Daniel T. Jenkins, Amicus Curiae New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends urges the Court (i) to reverse the Tax Court's decision granting Defendant-Appellee's motion for summary judgment and imposition of a penalty and (ii) to remand this case for further proceedings.

Dated:  White Plains, New York,  June 6, 2006

  • Respectfully submitted,
  • Oxman Tulis Kirkpatrick Whyatt and Geiger LLP
  • By: Thomas Whyatt (TW 9879) 120 Bloomingdale Road, White Plains, New York 10605-1500 (914) 422-3900
    • Attorney for Amicus Curiae

  • [1] Yearly meetings originated as “meetings for sufferings” formed by Friends' meetings throughout a region to support those local meetings that were decimated by religious persecution in England in the 1660s – see Hugh Barbour and J. William Frost, The Quakers (New York, Westport, London: Greenwood Press 1988) (hereinafter cited as “The Quakers”) at 68. The practice of recording and publicizing individual sufferings for their religious conscience continues to this day. It remains New York Yearly Meeting's role to support and guide Quakers and their local meetings.
  • [2] New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Minutes of Spring Sessions 2006 at 2.
  • [3] A clearness committee is a time-tested Quaker support mechanism designed centuries ago to bring spiritual clarity and power to bear on a specific worldly challenge that faces an individual. Many Friends utilize the traditional practice of “seeking clearness” from a specially-called group of persons in the meeting when they feel called to some important change in their lives. The “clearness committee” seeks to assist in discerning whether the individual's concern or leading is consistent with other revelations of the Spirit by testing it and clarifying its implications for action.
  • [4] New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Minutes of Spring Sessions 2006 at 3.
  • [5] Declaration “Against All Plotters and Fighters in the World” addressed to Charles II by George Fox, Richard Hubberthorne and 10 other Friends, January 21, 1661; quoted in The Journal of George Fox at 399-400; see also Peter Brock, The Quaker Peace Testimony 1660 to 1914 (Sessions Book Trust, York, England 1990) (hereinafter cited as “Brock”), at 25.
  • [6] Sandra Cronk, A Study of the Spiritual Basis of the Quaker Peace Testimony (Philadelphia, Tract Association of Friends, 1984) (hereinafter cited as “Cronk”) at 4
  • [7] New Revised Standard Version – Holy Bible, (New York, Oxford University Press, 1989) Matt. 5:43-45 (hereinafter cited as “Holy Bible”), as quoted in John Edminster, Jesus Christ Forbids War (New York, 2005)(hereinafter cited as “Edminster”) at 1.
  • [8] Holy Bible, Luke 9:51-56, as quoted in Robert L. Thomas and Stanley N. Grundy, The NIV Harmony of the Gospels (San Francisco, Harper, 1988) at 128
  • [9] Holy Bible, Luke 22:49-51, John 18:10-11 as quoted in Edminster, footnote 7, at 1.
  • [10] Holy Bible, Luke 23:34 as quoted in Edminster, footnote 7, at 1.
  • [11] Edminster, footnote 7, at 1
  • [12] Holy Bible, James 4:1-3 as quoted in Edminster, footnote 7, at 1.
  • [13] Howard Brinton, Friends for 350 Years (Pendle Hill Publications, Wallingford Pennsylvania, 2002) at 195. See also Brock, footnote 5, at 27-29.
  • [14] Robert Barclay, An Apology for the True Christian Divinity (1676) quoted at Dean Freiday, ed., Barclay's Apology in Modern English (Newberg Oregon, The Barclay Press, 1991)(hereinafter cited as “Barclay”) at 427
  • [15] Barclay, footnote 14, at 425.
  • [16] John L. Nickalls, ed., The Journal of George Fox (London: Cambridge University Press 1952)(hereinafter cited as “Journal of George Fox”) at 11
  • [17] Cronk, footnote 6, at 13
  • [18] see Cronk, footnote 6, at 11 and Brock, footnote 5, at 14
  • [19] see Brock, footnote 5, at 31
  • [20] Allinson Papers, Box 11B, 1780, as quoted in Jack D Marietta, The Reformation of American Quakerism 1748-1783 (University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1984) at 264 (hereinafter cited as “Marietta”).
  • [21] see Marietta, footnote 20, at 262
  • [22] The Quakers at 154, and Allen C. Thomas, A History of the Friends In America (Philadelphia, John C. Winston Company, 1919) at 103.
  • [23] Brock, footnote 5, at 148.
  • [24] Brock, footnote 5, at 156.
  • [25] See Brock, footnote 5, at 184-196.
  • [26] Ruth Benn and Ed Hedemann, War Tax Resistance: A Guide to Withholding Your Support from the Military (New York, War Resisters League, 2003)(hereinafter cited as “Benn”) at 72.
  • [27] Brock, footnote 5, at 184-196
  • [28] Brock, footnote 5, at 117.
  • [29] The Journal and Major Essays of John Woolman, Phillips P. Moulton, ed. (New York 1971), at 85-86; quoted and discussed in Brock, footnote 5, at 118.
  • [30] Quoted in Brock, footnote 5, at 190. Two years later another broader minute was approved which declared:  We find in several different quarters a religious scruple hath appeared and increases among Friends, against the payment of taxes, imposed for the purpose of carrying on the present war; they being deeply concerned and engaged faithfully to maintain our Christian testimony against joining with or supporting the spirit of wars and fightings, which hath remarkably tended to unite us in a deep sympathy with the seed of life in their hearts.... [Friends are urged] to avoid complying with the injunctions and requisitions made for the purpose of carry on war, which may produce uneasiness to themselves and tend to increase the sufferings of their brethren.
  • [31] See Brock, footnote 5, at 194-196.
  • [32] Reports of the Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of 1821 Assembled for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution of the State of New York, Albany, 1821 (hereinafter cited as “Reports of 1821 Convention”) at 575.
  • [33] Reports of 1821 Convention, footnote 32 at 575.
  • [34] New York Assembly Committee on the Militia and Public Defense, Report Number 170, on the Memorial and Remonstrance of the Religious Society of Friends in the State of New York, March 4, 1841 (hereinafter cited as “1841 Assembly Committee Report”) at 1.
  • [35] 1841 Assembly Committee Report, footnote 34,  at 1.
  • [36] Quaker Crosscurrents: 300 Years of Friends in the New York Yearly Meetings, Hugh Barbour, ed. (Syracuse University Press 1995) (hereinafter cited as “Quaker Crosscurrents ”), at 313.
  • [37] Minutes and Proceedings of the 276th/277th Sessions of New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Minute #117, at 23 and Minute #20, at 73 (July 25-August 1, 1971 and July 30-August 6, 1972).
  • [38] New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Brief Amicus Curiae, Packard v. United States, 7 F.Supp.2d (D. Conn. 1998) at 9.
  • [39] Saranac Lake Monthly Meeting, New York Yearly Meeting of Religious Society of Friends, Minutes of February 19, 2006 and Northeast Regional Meeting, New York Yearly Meeting of Religious Society of Friends, Minutes of February 25, 2006.
  • [40] Brock, footnote 5, at 48.
  • [41] See, e.g., Brock, footnote 5, at 142-183 and 290-298.
  • [42] Brock, footnote 5, at 29.
  • [43] Quaker Crosscurrents, footnote 36, at 253, 281, 304-307, 312.
  • [44] See, e.g., Hans A. Schmitt, Quakers and Nazis: Inner Light in Outer Darkness (University of Missouri Press 1997) at 21.
  • [45] Other examples include the International Peace Research Association, which was founded by Quakers Kenneth and Elise Boulding, and VISA and VISTA, which are modeled on earlier Quaker youth work camp programs. See Quaker Crosscurrents, footnote 36, at 295.
  • [46] Avalon Project, The Fundamental Constitutions for the Province of East New Jersey in North America, Anno Domini 1683 (New Haven, Yale University, 2006)(hereinafter cited as “Fundamental Constitutions”) at Section VII.
  • [47] The Colonial Laws of New York, Volume III, at 1068-70.
  • [48] Brock, footnote 5, at 48.
  • [49] Brock, footnote 5, at 146-147; see, e.g., Sessions Laws of the State of New York: 1777-1784, Volume I, at 49.
  • [50] Brock, footnote 5, at 156-157; see, e.g., Revised Statutes of the State of New York (1829), Volume I, at 286, 317.
  • [51] Quaker Crosscurrents, footnote 36, at 53.  New York State Constitution of 1777 at Article 40 states “That all such inhabitants of this State, being of the people called Quakers as, from their scruples of conscience, may be averse to the bearing of arms, be therefrom excused by the legislature, and do pay to the state such sums of money, in lieu of their personal service, as the same; may in the judgement of the legislature, be worth.”
  • [52] Indeed, James Madison even attempted to include a clause for exempting conscientious objectors in the Bill of Rights. See Brock, footnote 5, at 156.
  • [53] See Brock, footnote 5, at 169. These acts generally required the provision of some alternative civilian service or the payment of a commutation or substitution fee.
  • [54] See, e.g., United States v. Seeger, 380 US 163, 170-171 (1965); United States v. Geary, 368 F.2d 144, 147-148 (2nd Circuit 1966); Military Selective Service Act, § 6(j), 50 USC (App.) § 456(j).
  • [55] Fundamental Constitutions, footnote 46, at Section VII.
  • [56] 1841 Assembly Committee Report, footnote 34, at 3.
  • [57] See Brock, footnote 5, at 169-170. The Act provided that conscientious objectors who chose not to perform alternative civilian service “shall pay the sum of three hundred dollars... to be applied to the benefit of the sick and wounded soldiers.”
  • [58] Benn, footnote 26, at 125
  • [59] New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, New York Yearly Meeting Yearbook Directory 2005: Proceedings and Appointments (New York, 2005) at 59.
  • [60] 42 USC § 2000bb-1(b)(2).
  • [61] Brad Igou, Amish Country News, Amish Series, (Bird-in-Hand Pennsylvania, Amish Country News, 1999 and 2005)(hereinafter cited as “Igou”) at, Part Five.
  • [62] Igou, footnote 61, at Part Five.

Corporate Disclosure Statement

Pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, amicus curiae New York Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends advises the Court that it is a religious corporation and that it does not have any parent companies, subsidiaries or affiliates that have issued shares to the public.