And it’s not that simple. The argument is that a law prohibiting the practice of polygamy was an unconstitutional infringement on a religious practice.
Later, the U.S. Supreme Court found that polygamy was not a constitutionally protected act. But now, under the push for gay marriage and such, one wonders why gay marriage enjoys constitutional protection but polygamy does not.
(Not that I’m pushing for a change, but I believe it’s hard to reconcile the two.)
That is the argument of FLDS, but this wasn't the case in point at the time of the revelation in 1843. The courts continually upheld the anti-polygamy laws throughout that period. The Edmunds–Tucker Act of 1887 was challenged and decided by the Supreme Court in 1890. By September 1890, federal officials were preparing to seize the church’s four temples, Woodruff announced the Manifesto on September 25 by publishing it in the church-owned Deseret Weekly. Coincidence?