ated ▁the ▁Free ▁Ex erc ise ▁Cla use ▁of ▁the ▁United ▁States ▁Constitution . ▁ ▁Kennedy ▁read ▁the ▁Smith ▁decision ▁as ▁requiring ▁a ▁comp elling ▁government al ▁interest ▁if ▁a ▁law ▁is ▁not ▁of ▁neutral ▁and ▁general ▁applic ability . ▁ ▁Kennedy ▁went ▁on , ▁in ▁a ▁section ▁S outer ▁and ▁White ▁refused ▁to ▁join , ▁to ▁conclude ▁that ▁although ▁the ▁ordin ances ▁were ▁fa cially ▁neutral , ▁they ▁were ▁religious ly ▁“ ger ry m ander ed ▁with ▁care ” ▁to ▁only ▁apply ▁to ▁religious ▁kill ings . ▁ ▁Kennedy , ▁in ▁a ▁section ▁only ▁joined ▁by ▁Stevens , ▁details ▁the ▁ordin ances ’ ▁legisl ative ▁history , ▁even ▁cit ing ▁t aped ▁ex cer pts ▁of ▁the ▁H iale ah ▁City ▁Council ▁Me eting . ▁ ▁Next , ▁in ▁a ▁section ▁S outer ▁refused ▁to ▁join , ▁Kennedy ▁notes ▁the ▁numerous ▁exem ptions ▁in ▁the ▁Florida ▁stat ute , ▁con cluding ▁the ▁law ▁is ▁not ▁generally ▁applicable ▁because ▁it ▁effectively ▁applies ▁“ only ▁against ▁conduct ▁motiv ated ▁by ▁religious ▁belief .” ▁ ▁Finally , ▁in ▁a ▁section ▁joined ▁by ▁the ▁full ▁seven ▁justice ▁majority , ▁Kennedy ▁applies ▁strict ▁scr ut iny , ▁which ▁the ▁city ▁ordin ances ▁fail . ▁ ▁Because ▁the ▁ordin ance ▁suppress ed ▁more ▁religious ▁conduct ▁than ▁was ▁necessary ▁to ▁achieve ▁its ▁stated ▁ends , ▁it ▁was ▁de emed ▁un const itution al , ▁with ▁Justice ▁Anthony ▁Kennedy ▁stating ▁in ▁the ▁decision , ▁“ rel ig ious ▁belief s ▁need ▁not ▁be ▁acceptable , ▁logical , ▁consistent ▁or