Letters from VA Governor, IL Mayor Show Nothing Wrong with RFRA
The Associated Press published an article today regarding H.B. 1228, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Among the quotes included in the article are one from the Governor of Virginia and another from Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.
According to the A.P., “Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe issued an open letter to Indiana corporations saying Virginia is a business-friendly state that does ‘not discriminate against our friends and neighbors,’ while Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel sent letters to more than a dozen Indiana businesses, urging them to relocate to a ‘welcoming place to people of all races, faiths and countries of origin.'”
Here’s the kicker: Both Virginia and Illinois have state Religious Freedom Restoration Acts on the books similar to H.B. 1228 and the law recently passed in Indiana! The fact Virginia and Illinois are both business-friendly states that do not discriminate shows that state Religious Freedom Restoration Acts are not discriminatory.
Virginia’s law says, “No government entity shall substantially burden a person’s free exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability unless it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is (i) essential to further a compelling governmental interest and (ii) the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”
Illinois’s law–passed in 1998–says, “Government may not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person (i) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and (ii) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”
Indiana’s law says, “A state action, or an action taken by an individual based on state action, may not substantially burden a person’s right to the exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a law or policy of general applicability, unless the state or political subdivision of the state demonstrates that applying the burden to the person’s exercise of religion is: (1) essential to further a compelling governmental interest; and (2) the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest.”
H.B. 1228 by Rep. Ballinger and Sen. Hester says, “A state action shall not substantially burden a person’s right to exercise of religion, even if the substantial burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless it is demonstrated that applying the substantial burden to the person’s exercise of religion in this particular instance: (1) Is essential to further a compelling governmental interest; and (2) Is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”
Governor McAuliffe and Mayor Emanuel are overlooking two glaring points: Each of their states has a law on the books similar to the laws passed in Indiana and being debated right now in Arkansas, and each of their states is still open for business.
Most states have a law or court ruling in place similar to H.B. 1228. The federal government has the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (signed by President Clinton in 1993) preventing federal entities from burdening the free exercise of religion. These laws have not hurt businesses; they have not been hijacked by extremists; they are simply commonsense legislation that gives equal protection to every person’s religious expression and prevents government infringement of that expression.
The Arkansas House will likely vote on H.B. 1228 today or tomorrow; you can contact your representative about the bill at (501) 682-6211, and you can leave a message for Governor Hutchinson at (501) 682-2345.
This morning the House Judiciary Committee voted to concur in the amendments the Arkansas Senate made to H.B. 1228, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).