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?

/
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.