In the Court's Opinion O'Connor acknowledged that the G-O Road "could have devastating effects on traditional Indian religious practices," but she perceived the Road like the Social Security number in Roy. For the Court she wrote that "The building of a road or the harvesting of timber on publicly owned land cannot meaningfully be distinguished from the use of a Social Security number." Since she viewed the road as an "incidental" interference with religious freedom, not a deliberate government attack on one's faith, it was permissible.

Return to Homepage