Religious vaccine exemptions
Perez v. City of San Antonio
In brief
- Where it stands
- Petition Pending
Awaiting an order on the petition
- What it’s about
- Gary Perez and Matilde Torres, ceremonial leaders of the Lipan Native American Church, say San Antonio’s plan to cut trees and drive away nesting cormorants at a river bend in a public park would damage ceremonies they hold there.
- What's at stake
- Perez and Torres’ challenge to the effect of San Antonio’s planned park work on their ceremonies remains unresolved.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
They ask the Supreme Court to review the Fifth Circuit’s conclusion that the plan would not seriously interfere with their religious practice.
Perez and Torres are ceremonial leaders of the Lipan Native American Church. They say ceremonies they hold at the river bend would be harmed by San Antonio’s planned tree cutting and effort to drive away nesting cormorants.
The Fifth Circuit concluded that San Antonio’s plan would not seriously interfere with Perez and Torres’ religious practice.
Question presented
1. Whether the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment permit courts, when deciding whether government action burdens religious exercise, to override a claimant’s sincere theological judgment of what the religious exercise requires. 2. Whether the government can satisfy its burden to prove that its action is the least religiously restrictive means available when, after notice that its action would burden religious exercise, the government admits that it failed to consider any workable alternatives prior to litigation.
What happens next
The petition is distributed for the Court’s Sept. 28, 2026, conference, where the justices may consider whether to hear it. That distribution does not mean the Court has agreed to take the case or guarantee when it will act.
Documents
Docket activity
Case data updated: title
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 7 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
New document added
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
More questions
- What are Perez and Torres asking the justices to decide?
- They ask whether judges may second-guess a sincere religious judgment about what a practice requires, and whether the city can prove it chose an option that burdens religion least after failing to consider workable alternatives before litigation, despite notice.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.