Universal Life Church Case Law
Phone: (614) 715-9048 Fax: (614) 715-9049
Email: info@ulccaselaw.com
ULC Case Law
1629 K Street NW, Ste 300
Washington, D.C. 20006

Religious Freedom Restoration Act

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb) is also known under the shortened name RFRA. Signed into United States federal law in 1993, this act aims to prevent the creation and implementation of any law(s) that places any substantial burden on a person’s free exercize rights of practicing their religion. The RFRA reinstates the Sherbert Test which was created through two cases: Sherbert v Verner and Wisconsin v Yoder, both of which mandate that strict scrutiny be used when determining if the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution – which guarantees religious freedom – has been violated.

Congress stated through its findings that “a religiously neutral law can burden a religion just as much as one that was intended to interfere with religion.” The RFRA states that that the “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.” The law provides an exception if two conditions are both met. First, if the burden is necessary for the “furtherance of a compelling government interest.” Under strict scrutiny, a government interest is compelling when it is more than routine and does more than simply improve government efficiency. A compelling interest relates directly with core constitutional issues. The second condition is that the rule must be the least restrictive way in which to further the government interest.

Title 42, Chapter 21B, § 2000bb. Congressional findings and declaration of purposes

(a) Findings

The Congress finds that–

(1) the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) laws “neutral” toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise;
(3) governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification;
(4) in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and
(5) the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests.

(b) Purposes

The purposes of this chapter are–

(1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and
(2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government.

 

Recent Posts

  • A town in Illinois was recently asked by the Freedom from Religion Foundation to stop sponsoring religious trips such as one to a Creationist museum. Illinois Township Asked to Stop Sponsoring Religious Trips 06/21/2019

    A town in Illinois was recently asked by the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) to stop sponsoring religious trips to creationist museums as well as other religious performances. The trip in question included visits to the Ark Encounter and Creation Museum, which are located in a nearby Kentucky city. This trip highlights some of the Read More

  • Missouri Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Transgender Student 06/18/2019

    In a case that is likely to have a significant impact on LGBT rights, the Missouri Supreme Court recently ruled that a discrimination lawsuit initiated by a transgender student in Kansas City is allowed to proceed. Legal action was first brought against the Blue Springs School District in October 2015 after administrators at the school Read More

  • Alabama’s governor recently signed an anti-abortion law. In doing so, he claimed that the anti-abortion measure reflects an emphasis on “the sanctity of life." Alabama Signs Anti-Abortion Law 06/14/2019

    Alabama’s governor recently signed an anti-abortion law. In doing so, he claimed that the anti-abortion measure reflects an emphasis on “the sanctity of life.”

  • The US House of Representatives passed the Equality Act, which is designed to protect LGBTQ+ individuals from discrimination in many areas. House of Representatives Passes Equality Act 06/12/2019

    The US House of Representatives recently passed the Equality Act, which is designed to protect LGBTQ individuals from discrimination that occurs in housing, public accommodations, the workplace and other arenas. First introduced in 2015, the bill also expands public accommodation protections to include discrimination based on sex as well as strengthens other protections. By expanding Read More

  • Texas has passed the "Save Chick-fil-A" bill, as a response to San Antonio barring the chain from its airport due to its history of anti-LGBT animus. Texas Passes “Save Chick-fil-A” Bill Despite Opposition by LGBTQ Advocates 06/06/2019

    After the San Antonio City Council voted to prohibit the Chick-fil-A fast food restaurant at the city’s airport due to anti-LGBTQ statements and actions made by the company, a number of Texas legislators responded to this decision and claimed that it violated the First Amendment. Response by Texas Legislature In response to the San Antonio Read More

  • Read More