The People vs. Ruggles (1811)- America's Godly Heritage Video 1

People v. Ruggles (1811)

• The case is one of the few convictions for blasphemy in U.S. history.
• Chancellor James Kent ruled that blasphemy was a common law crime, despite a provision in the New York state constitution similar to the First Amendment.
• Ruggles was convicted of blasphemy for stating that "Jesus Christ was a bastard and his mother must be a whore" and sentenced to three months of jail time and a $500 fine.

Definition of Blasphemy

• The legal definition of blasphemy is "maliciously reviling God, or religion."

Kent's Interpretation

• Kent believed that Americans, like the English, needed "all the moral discipline, and of those principles of virtue, which help to bind society together."
• He interpreted Article 38 of the New York constitution to provide "a free and universal toleration, without any of the tests, disabilities, or discriminations, incident to a religious establishment."

Application of Blasphemy

• Kent ruled that blasphemy in New York only applied to attacks on Christianity, not other religions.
• He cited laws against immorality and laws recognizing Sunday as the day of worship as evidence of Christianity's status under the common law.

Significance and Legacy

• Kent's notion that state common law embraced Christianity was similar to that of Justice Joseph Story and contrary to the views of Thomas Jefferson.
• The Supreme Court's decision in Burstyn v. Wilson (1952) effectively ended American blasphemy laws, although some states still have blasphemy laws on the books.

Blasphemy in the United States

• The case of People v. Ruggles (1811) is the first reported case of prosecution for blasphemy in the State of New York.
• John Ruggles was arrested, charged with blasphemy, and tried in the Court of Oyer and Terminer, Washington County, on June 11, 1811, for saying "Jesus Christ was a bastard, and his mother must be a whore" in a crowded tavern.
• Ruggles was found guilty and sentenced to three months in prison and fined $500 by Justice Ambrose Spencer.

Chief Justice Kent's Opinion

• Chief Justice James Kent delivered the opinion of the unanimous court, stating that the Constitution does not forbid judicial cognizance of offenses against religion and morality.
• These offenses are punishable because they "strike at the root of moral obligation, and weaken the security of the social ties."
• Kent emphasized the need for moral discipline and principles of virtue to bind society together.

The Role of Christianity

• The people of New York, like the people of the United States, profess the general doctrines of Christianity as the rule of their faith and practice.
• Scandalizing the author of these doctrines is considered a gross violation of decency and good order.
• Chief Justice Kent considered Christianity to be the basis of public morals in the United States.

The Constitutional Convention of 1821

• During the debates, James Kent stated that blasphemous words are a breach of public morals and an offense against public decency.
• The Convention voted to confirm the Ruggles decision and Chief Justice Kent's reasoning.
• Kent's reasoning was that blasphemy was an outrage upon public decorum, and if sanctioned, would shock the moral sense of the country and degrade its character as a Christian people.