Coming Soon in variety of sizes. Please credit RFRAperils.com
Another slippery slope
The so-called bipartisan support for RFRA fell apart before the 2000 re-enactment because it is a tool for discrimination and extreme imposition of beliefs on third parties, as I document here. The actual hijacking is the Court’s aggrandizement of its power through RFRA to impose its preferred social policies and second-guess Congress.
A question only the “least restrictive means” test would justify.
Best reason to veto a RFRA: Leave religious liberty to the First Am. Congress should do the same
The oral argument in Zubik v. Burwell was yet another lesson that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) is fundamentally an unworkable and unreasonable statute that trenches on the separation of powers and erases the separation of church and state. It tempts Justices to be super-legislators, believers tyrants, and the federal government a bowl of […]
Thank you, Disney!
The taboo against prosecuting clergy dies hard but it must if kids are to be safe
Religious leaders brazenly use “religious liberty” as though there is a constitutional right to be unreasonable.
“liberty” demanded in Zubik is extreme and unprecedented
Righteous acts for the protection of children
This is a rfra plus redundancy of First Amendment Protections. Waste of time and dangerous for all vulnerable individuals whether “third parties” or not. One point: the protection for firing based on faith is Hosanna Tabor on steroids.
Professor Marci A. Hamilton’s Top 10 Lists
- Concise, but informative Top 10 lists relating to religious freedom topics
- Great for captivating readers who have a minimal background in RFRA/don’t read long articles