McDaniel v. Paty
His opponent, Selma Cash Paty, successfully challenged his candidacy based on a state law that forbade ordained ministers from elected office.Ever since the Free Exercise Clause was incorporated against the states by Cantwell v. Connecticut the Court has recognized that the First Amendment protects religious beliefs absolutely.Quoting from Wisconsin v. Yoder the Court explains that "only those interests of the highest order...can overbalance legitimate claims to the free exercise of religion".[4][5] The Tennessee Supreme Court had already decided that the state interest in preventing the establishment of religion and avoiding divisiveness overcame McDaniel's Free Exercise claim.However widely that view may have been held in the 18th century by many, including enlightened statesmen of that day, the American experience provides no persuasive support for the fear that clergymen in public office will be less careful of anti-establishment interests or less faithful to their oaths of civil office than their unordained counterparts.The Court found that the Tennessee state constitutional provision "imposed an unconstitutional penalty upon appellant's exercise of his religious faith".