Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 1 of 9

WINWARD LAW, PLLC

JAY T. WINWARD - 11806
132 West Tabernacle, Bldg. B
St. George, Utah 84770
Telephone: (435) 628-1191
Fax: (435) 628-5341
Attorney for Seth Steed Jeffs

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

SETH JEFFS SUPPLEMENT TO

MOTION TO DISMISS
INDICTMENT

vs.
Case No. 2:16-cr-0082-TS
LYLE STEED JEFFS, et al,
Honorable Ted Stewart
Defendant.

Defendant, Seth Steed Jeffs, by and through his counsel of record, Jay T. Winward
hereby submits this Seth Jeffs Supplement to Motion to Dismiss Indictment.
ISSUES PRESENTED
Seth Steed Jeffs asks this Court to refer to and incorporate by reference the Issues
Presented in Lyle Steed Jeffs Supplemental Brief as well as those raised in John
Waymans supplement. Both briefs accurately present the issues before this Court.

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 2 of 9

STATEMENT OF FACTS
In addition to the facts, exhibits and testimony provided in Lyle Jeffs Supplement,
Seth Jeffs asks this court to consider the following in its determination:
Seth Jeffs and his family applied for and determined to be legally eligible for
SNAP benefits. Tr., pg. 74, lines 22-25; pg. 78, lines 5-7.
Seth Jeffs and his family used their benefits to purchase eligible food items and
donate those food items to the Bishops Storehouse. Tr., pg. 76, lines 2-15.
Seth Jeffs testifies and teaches the principals of his church and his religious
beliefs, including the law of consecration, to his family and anyone else when
called to. Tr., pg. 71-72.
Seth Jeffs worked at the Bishops Storehouse and accepted food and donations
from others who likewise believed those items should be consecrated. Tr., pg.
73, lines. 16-25.
Seth Jeffs Prior Affidavit, Declaration, Verification and Testimony Supporting
Sincerely Held Religious Belief and Substantial Burden, filed on September 27,
2016, Dkt. 582 Attachment 1(Seth Jeffs Affidavit Supporting Belief).
Notice of History of Nutrition Assistance Renewal, attached hereto as Exhibit
1. This exhibit was obtained from the Page, Arizona office of the Arizona
Department of Economic Security and Family Assistance Administration. This

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 3 of 9

exhibit is an approval of a Nutrition Assistance Renewal application from

April 11, 2016 listing Seth Jeffs as a beneficiary (Notice). 1
ARGUMENT
SNAP BENEFITS RULES AND REGULATIONS BURDEN SETH JEFFS
RELIGION UNDER RFRA.
Seth Jeffs will address arguments specific to him, but asks this Court to again refer to
Lyle Jeffs' Supplement for additional legal argument and support.
A.

Sincerely Held Religious Belief.

Seth Jeffs believes in the FLDS Church, its prophets, the Standard Works, the

United Order, and the Law of Consecration as contained in the Doctrine and Covenants.
See Jeffs Affidavit Supporting Belief; Tr., pages. 66-68. He also believes that his
Heavenly Father created everything and everything, including Mr. Jeffs, is His. Tr., pg.
68, lines. 22-24. Mr. Jeffs evidences the sincerity of his belief by donating anything that
is put into his hands or care. This includes personal property, food, labours, and even the
bearing of his testimony. Tr., pg. 69, lines 5-16.
Mr. Jeffs also believes that he is given a testimony from God and that it is his
privilege to share that testimony. Tr., pg. 70, lines 14-22. Mr. Jeffs shares his testimony
when called upon and teaches his beliefs via that testimony to others of the faith and his
1

Prior to this filing, Counsel provided a copy of this document to the Government so that it may have the
opportunity to verify the information. The Arizona Department of Economic Security could not provide
any other documentation and indicated a print out of payments dating back to the original application,
approximately 2011-12 could be obtained via creation of an online account. At present, unfortunately,
FLDS members do not access the internet. Regardless, the Notice combined with Seth Jeffs testimony
establishes that he is a SNAP recipient. It is not anticipated that the U.S. Attorneys office disputes this
fact.
3

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 4 of 9

family. He has a responsibility to teach his religious beliefs to his family and others,
when called upon. Tr., pg. 71, lines 9-19. Mr. Jeffs demonstrates his belief by teaching
his family from the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the principals of
the church.

Tr., pg. 72, lines 1-12.

Teaching these principals and living them,

specifically the law of consecration, is required for his and his familys salvation. Tr., pg.
72, lines 13-15.
Mr. Jeffs is not perfect in the exercise of his faith and acknowledges his
weaknesses, but the sincerity of his faith is clear. Not only does his in-court testimony
and life evidence his sincere belief, but this Court previously found that Defendant will
follow the dictates of Warren Jeffs, even if they run counter to the orders of the
Courtthis is a community that follows the instructions of their prophet. Memorandum
Decision and Order of Revocation and Detention, filed on August 23, 2016, Dkt. 511.
Mr. Jeffs follows his faith and prophet, even to his own peril at times, but he does so
sincerely with all his heart, might, mind, and strength.
B.

Substantial Burden.
The Government has substantially burdened Mr. Jeffs sincere religious belief by

prohibiting his efforts to live the law of consecration. Particularly troubling is his arrest,
detention, prosecution, and possible conviction for teaching the law of consecration,
working in the Storehouse and donating eligible food items legally obtained with his
SNAP benefit.

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 5 of 9

As noted in Lyle Jeffs Supplement:

In Navajo Nation, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that the Supreme Courts decision in
Sherbert, relied and incorporated by Congress into RFRA, lead to the conclusion
that under RFRA, a substantial burden is imposed when an individual is forced to
choose between following the tenets of their religion, or receiving a governmental
benefit. 535 F.3d at 1069-1070. Like the Seventh Day Adventist in Sherbert, the
government is forcing Seth Steed Jeffs to choose between following his religion
and foregoing receiving SNAP card benefits from the Government, on one hand, --or ignoring the tenets of his religion, foregoing donating food in order to receive
these SNAP benefits from the Government.
Mr. Jeffs testified that if he cant give everything then he cant live his religion.
He testified its either a choice of giving up the food stamps or giving up my religion.
Tr., pg. 75, lines 4-7. The USDA does not ask anyone to disclose how they will use
eligible food items. It is incongruous that the USDA would require anyone to choose
between sharing food or receiving a SNAP benefit for which they are otherwise eligible.
To force Mr. Jeffs to make such a choice, or prosecute him for doing so because of his
religious beliefs, violates the religious principals this country was founded on.
Mr. Jeffs is burdened by not being able to teach the principal of consecration of all
items, including eligible food items derived from SNAP benefits.

Mr. Jeffs has a

constitutional right to speech and religious speech. If he cannot teach and instruct his
family and share his testimony and belief, then he is burdened and cannot exercise his
religion. Tr., pg. 73, lines 5-8. Mr. Jeffs has the constitutional right to teach what he
believes and promote obedience to the law of consecration. If others, including his own
family, then donate eligible food items derived from SNAP benefits he cannot be
punished simply because he vocalized his belief.

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 6 of 9

Mr. Jeffs must be able to serve in his community as part of his religion. Tr., pg.
74, lines 5-21. This includes working in the Bishops Storehouse. Mr. Jeffs work in the
Storehouse is part of his religion and, as such, he must be allowed to accept donations
regardless of their source. If he is prohibited from being able to facilitate donations, then
his religious rights are burdened. It would be akin to asking a PTA president to verify
and reject any baked goods for the school bake sale that came from SNAP families or
worse, holding the PTA president criminally responsible if he or she accepted such a
donation. Similarly, a Church Pastor cannot be forced to reject SNAP food at the
Christmas potluck or be charged with a crime. The USDA does not prohibit this type of
conduct. Tr., pg. 130, lines 1-8. Therefore, Mr. Jeffs work in the storehouse and his
facilitation of consecrated donation is protected by RFRA and common sense.
C.

Compelling Interest
Mr. Jeffs asks the Court to rely on the arguments made in Lyle Jeffs and John

Waymans supplements with the additional argument that if the government has a
compelling interest, then they would prohibit current SNAP card holders from donating
to the Storehouse. The government, however, continues to allow FLDS members to
purchase food at Costco, or wherever else, and donate.

The USDA would also

promulgate rules and regulations prohibiting any SNAP recipient from donating, sharing,
or wasting eligible food items. They dont have such a regulation, and to hold FLDS
members to a higher requirement is discriminatory.

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 7 of 9

D.

Least Restrictive Means

In addition to the arguments made by John Wayman and Lyle Jeffs, and the lesser

restrictions they identify, Mr. Seth Jeffs asks:

1) Why didnt SNAP administrators ask or allow Mr. Jeffs to account for the food
he and his family donated and the amount they received back?
2) Why didnt the SNAP program ask or allow Mr. Jeffs and his family to
account for their caloric intake?
3) Why not allow Mr. Jeffs and his family to donate so long as they receive back
the same quantity of food they donated?
4) Why not ask the FLDS Church or the Storehouse to account to the government
SNAP eligible food items it received and disbursed?
The foregoing questions demonstrate simple ways the government could have
implemented less restrictive means rather than arresting Mr. Jeffs and stating that he
cannot teach, facilitate or donate SNAP eligible food. Not only has the government
failed to implement the least restrictive means, they havent even considered
accommodating Mr. Jeffs or the FLDS people. Tr., pg. 130, lines 4-17. Mr. Jeffs stated,
in response to a direct question by the Court, that he didnt know [he] had to seek an
accommodation. Tr., pg. 130, lines 18-19. Which begs the final question why not just
inform Mr. Jeffs that his teaching, facilitating and donating may be a violation and that he
needed to explore an accommodation with the government?

Mr. Jeffs doesnt have to

seek an accommodation, that is the governments responsibility, and the burden placed on

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 8 of 9

him, including this prosecution, could have been avoided had SNAP administrators had a
conversation with him, the FLDS Church, and other SNAP receiving members.
CONCLUSION
The United States Constitution and RFRA protect Seth Jeffs and allow him to
teach and testify regarding the law of consecration, including the donation of SNAP
eligible food items. RFRA protects his right to donate his SNAP eligible food items to
the Storehouse as well as his working at the Storehouse. To prohibit him from donating
his SNAP eligible food, working in the Storehouse, or speaking about the religious
principals he believes is a substantial burden. The Government cannot prove that it has a
compelling interest in burdening Mr. Jeffs, nor can they prove they have implemented the
least restrictive means to justify the burden they have placed on Mr. Jeffs.
Therefore, Mr. Jeffs ask that this Court find that he has a sincere religious belief;
that the government has imposed a substantial burden on his religious belief; that the
government does not have a compelling interest in prohibiting Mr. Jeffs religious
conduct; and that they have not implemented the least restrictive means to monitor that
conduct. This Court should dismiss the Indictment against Mr. Seth Jeffs.
DATED this 21st day of October, 2016.

/s/ Jay T. Winward

JAY T. WINWARD,
Attorney for Seth Steed Jeffs

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628 Filed 10/21/16 Page 9 of 9

DELIVERY CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that on the 21st day of October, 2016 I electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which sent notification of
such filing to all parties.
/s/Dawn Judd
Legal Secretary

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628-1 Filed 10/21/16 Page 1 of 3

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628-1 Filed 10/21/16 Page 2 of 3

Case 2:16-cr-00082-TS-RTB Document 628-1 Filed 10/21/16 Page 3 of 3