Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
In this paper I will describe the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
This Act was used to contradict the decision of the court case of Employment
Division v. Smith, which allowed the government to forbid any religious act without giving a reason. The RFRA brought back the requirement that the government provide an adequate reason to forbid any religious act. The government once again had to show that the act was of compelling interest against the state.
In 1993 one of the most important acts that has gone thorough Congress was passed (Religious Freedom, Map of the RFRA). This was the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993 (Religious Freedom, Map of the RFRA). This act was passed to answer the 1990 court case Employment Division v. Smith (Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA). Employment Division v. Smith was a court case in which the issue was whether "Sacramental use of peyote by members of the Native
American Church was protected under the free exercise clause of the First
Amendment, which provides that Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise of religion'."(Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA). According to Justice Scalia, "if prohibiting the exercise of religion was merely the incidental effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid provision, the
First Amendment was not offended." (Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA).
Thus,
"...the government no longer had to justify most burdens on religious exercise.
The free exercise clause offered protection only if a particular religious practice was singled out for discriminatory treatment. In short, free exercise was a sub category of equal protection. This placed religious rights in an inferior position to other First Amendment rights such as freedom of speech and press." (Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA).
This court case caused a series of court cases about religious freedoms
(Religious Freedom, Map of the RFRA).
In this paper I will describe the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
This Act was used to contradict the decision of the court case of Employment
Division v. Smith, which allowed the government to forbid any religious act without giving a reason. The RFRA brought back the requirement that the government provide an adequate reason to forbid any religious act. The government once again had to show that the act was of compelling interest against the state.
In 1993 one of the most important acts that has gone thorough Congress was passed (Religious Freedom, Map of the RFRA). This was the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993 (Religious Freedom, Map of the RFRA). This act was passed to answer the 1990 court case Employment Division v. Smith (Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA). Employment Division v. Smith was a court case in which the issue was whether "Sacramental use of peyote by members of the Native
American Church was protected under the free exercise clause of the First
Amendment, which provides that Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise of religion'."(Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA). According to Justice Scalia, "if prohibiting the exercise of religion was merely the incidental effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid provision, the
First Amendment was not offended." (Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA).
Thus,
"...the government no longer had to justify most burdens on religious exercise.
The free exercise clause offered protection only if a particular religious practice was singled out for discriminatory treatment. In short, free exercise was a sub category of equal protection. This placed religious rights in an inferior position to other First Amendment rights such as freedom of speech and press." (Questions and Answers, Map of the RFRA).
This court case caused a series of court cases about religious freedoms
(Religious Freedom, Map of the RFRA).