Last week, we discussed (https://wp.me/pecX6i-4Cz) how the 14th Am gave Congress power to hold states accountable for violating rights protected in Amdts 1-9. In Sherbert v Verner (1963), SCOTUS held gov’t CANNOT substantially burden free exercise of religion unless it shows it has a compelling interest to do so. But in 1990, SCOTUS changed course in Employment Division v Smith, holding a state CAN substantially burden free exercise of religion, even absent a compelling interest to do so, so long as the law is “neutral” toward religion – meaning, it imposes the same burden on all religions. So, it’s all good, as long as the gov’t stops ALL faiths from practicing?!?! Both Dems & Repubs HATED that case, so they passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) – UNANIMOUSLY in the House, and 97-3 in the Senate! Clinton signed it into law. RFRA restored Sherbert’s more protective test, so once again a law could NOT substantially burden the free exercise of religion without a compelling interest for doing so.
Thank you!