Obama Administration Calls The Supreme Court’s Bluff In Hobby Lobby, Think Progress
Exactly! There is no substantial in this burden!
Substantial Confusion on RFRA’s “Substantial Burden” Requirement?
16312 Comments
/
Debates over RFRA sound like policy debates. Why? Because it turns courts into legislatures making their own laws for religious claimants. It is unconstitutional. http://rfrafolly.com/professor-marci-a-hamilton-the-religious-freedom-restoration-act-is-unconstitutional-period-1-u-pa-j-const-l-1-1998/
Professor Laycock Letter of academics in support of TX RFRA amendment
Professor Laycock in support of TX RFRA amendment (which would have removed “substantial” as modifier of “burden” and made the TRFRA a state constitutional amendment) Letter of academics.