Written by Don ByrdIn the newest issue of the BJC’s Report From the Capital, General Counsel K. Hollyn Hollman discusses highly controversial religious freedom legislation vetoed by the Arizona Governor because it raised discrimination concerns. The proposal and the ensuing media storm cast an unfortunate shadow on RFRA legislation.
In her column, Hollman offers reasons why the Arizona bill escalated from a proposal to strengthen religious liberty protection into a culture war clash. In this climate, she suggests, proposals like the Arizona law are likely to cause more harm than good to the cause of religious liberty.
Read the full post for an excerpt…
Written by Don ByrdRFRA 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.
Written by Don ByrdLast week, I posted about the effort in the Mississippi legislature to adopt a Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Unfortunately, in recent months, state RFRA proposals have become increasingly controversial, partly because the language of many of the bills strays too far from the careful safeguards in the federal version, and partly due to the extreme rhetoric from both advocates and opponents.
Perhaps in response to the intense debate, the Mississippi House earlier today voted to send the measure back to be studied by committees, rather than voting on the bill itself.
Written By Don Byrd
The US Supreme Court hearing in the contraception mandate cases is coming up later this month. Writing in the Boston Globe, Boston College law professor Kent Greenfield offers views from the perspective of corporate law, as he considers the ramifications should the court hold that corporations are people for the purposes of RFRA protection in a case like this.
Written by Don ByrdThe Mississippi State House is considering a state Religious Freedom Restoration Act bill, recently passed by the Senate. Like most RFRA legislation, this bill would prohibit the government from substantially burdening a person’s religious exercise unless it is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. Unlike many other RFRA laws, Mississippi’s would trigger this high threshold for *any burden* on religious exercise, regardless of whether it is substantial.
