Written by Don ByrdBy a 19-16 margin, the State Senate in Maine today rejected a bill that would have prohibited the state government from placing any burden on religious exercise unless required to achieve a compelling government interest. Similar to the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) this bill departs significantly from that law by not requiring the burden on a person’s religious exercise to be “substantial” before triggering this threshold.
By Brent Walker, Executive Director
When the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments on March 25 in the contraception case involving Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, it will be asked to decide novel and difficult questions concerning the interpretation and application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
From the February 2014 Report from the Capital.
Written by Don ByrdThe Supreme Court’s hearing later this Spring will rule on whether the contraception mandate in the Affordable Care Act oversteps the First Amendment’s religious freedom guarantees as spelled out in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). RFRA limits the federal government’s ability to substantially burden a person’s religious exercise. Much of the contraception mandate battle focuses on the extent of that law’s protections. In what circumstances can corporations qualify as persons protected by the law? Does a mandate regulating a corporation substantially burden the religious exercise of the owners of the corporation?
Written by Don ByrdLate last year, I posted about a proposal by a Maine legislator to adopt a state version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, as many other states have done. Notably, the Maine RFRA would have significant differently from the federal version by requiring the government to justify any burden on religious exercise (the federal version and most state versions require this only when a person’s religious exercise is “substantially” burdened. You can read the post for more about why this difference matters).
By Holly Hollman, General Counsel
The Obama administration’s contraceptive mandate — the requirement, under the Affordable Care Act, that most employer-provided health insurance plans cover all FDA-approved methods of contraception — continues to stir controversy and spawn new lawsuits at a dizzying rate.
From the January 2014 Report from the Capital
