Mike converted to the Pastafarian religion and is now a part of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Pastafarianism believes that man was designed and animated by the impact of a "noodly appendage" of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. According to the Pastafarian Doctrine, pirates are spiritual beings, and global warming is due to the high and brutal records of pirate imprisonment and killing. Disciples of Pastafarianism speak in pirate accent and dress in pirate regalia, including eyepieces and pirate weapons, as an obvious representation of their honor for their idols.

To comply with the Pastafarian dress code, Mike received aneye patch and an inflatable sword. When Bryan first wore his pirate regalia to school, he createda pretty impressivein the corridors and classrooms. Many students laughed at Mike, someridiculed his strange pirate-style jargon. Because of the response,his dress was created, a school administrator obstructed Bryanas he was on his way to the first period and told him to discard his eye patch and his pirate sword. Bryan protested that the patch and sword are outward expressions of his religious beliefs and that he is expected as a Pastafarian to use them. However, he eventually obeyed the administrator's instructions.

Following the first period, Mike put the eye patch back on, drew a picture of a sword, and took it around with him to his next class. the same administrator approached him again and ordered him to remove the patch and the sword picture away. Mike opposed again that he was simply trying tofollow his faith, and explained that if Christians were permitted to wear a cross necklace, then he should be entitled to wear his eye patch and carry his inflatable. The administrator responded that unlike a cross necklace,Bryan's pirate costume was drawing a meaningful amount of attention and was having a highly disruptive impact on the educational process.Bryan refused to remove the patch or put away his sword picture. The administrator gave him an in-school suspension and warned him not to bring the eye patch, inflatable sword, or sword picture back to school. Despite the notification by the school administrator, Mike returned to school the next day with his eye patch and sword pictures. More administrators, including the principal and the School Resource Officer, informed Bryan thathis outfit disrupted the school dress code's prohibition on clothing that is "inappropriate or disruptive to classroom instruction."When Bryan refused to put away his eye patch and sword picture, he received in-school suspension for the rest of that day and at-home suspension for the next day. Mike asserts that his First Amendment right to Free Exercise of his faith was infringed when he was dismissed by school officials for using the religious form. Consider that the case is now before a court based on Mike's Free Exercise claim. Who will win this case - Mike or school officials?

Bryan Killian's suspension from his public school based upon his religious attire violated/did not violate] Bryan's Free Exercise rights under the First Amendment because.

Under the Sherbet analysis, the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment is violated if.

under a Smith framework "neutral law of general applicability" analysis articulated in the Smith case.

The result of this concern under a Sherbet analysis is similar or different from the outcome following a Smith analysis.