Supreme Court Argument Next Week Puts Spotlight on RFRA

Written by Don Byrd
On Tuesday, the US Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in 2 cases regarding the contraception coverage mandate for employers providing health insurance. The plaintiff companies argue the requirement forces their owners to violate their religious beliefs. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, they claim, prohibits the government from placing such a burden, even on for-profit companies.

As this Associated Press preview demonstrates, expressing the owners’ faith through company policy is not new for Hobby Lobby.

Are RFRA Fights Giving Religious Liberty a Bad Name?

Written by Don Byrd
RFRA is getting a bad rap these days. The 1993 federal legislation, which has spawned more than a dozen state-law copycats (or near copies), has served the cause of religious liberty well by protecting religious exercise incidentally but substantially burdened by the government. Its measured approach accomplishes that protection while safeguarding against allowing religion to be a trump card against government regulation. Unfortunately, misguided state amendments and hot-button cultural issues have stretched RFRA’s reach, and the rhetoric surrounding it, almost beyond recognition.

Writing in Slate, Emily Bazelon makes the strong argument that RFRA and religious liberty are worth defending, despite the recent spate of bad press both have received.

BJC’s Walker Discusses Contraception Case Briefs, Warns Against Finding RFRA Unconstitutional

Written by Don Byrd
The Baptist Joint Committee’s Brent Walker weighed in today on briefs filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the contraception mandate cases. Writing for ABP, he rejects the argument raised by a lawyer for the Freedom From Religion Foundation that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the law at the heart of the contraception dispute, is unconstitutional. Walker makes the case that RFRA is a perfectly acceptable means of strengthening religious liberty guarantees.