Free Exercise

The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) permits lawsuits seeking money damages against individual federal employees.

Attorney Ryan Snow has released a new book that is designed to bring non-lawyers up to date on the most important religious liberty debate facing America. Religious Freedom: What’s All the Freedom About recounts the history behind religious freedom laws, and includes an history of how Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA, in 1993 – a feat hardly imaginable today.  

In a 147-page ruling issued today, New York Federal Judge Paul Engelmayer found that the Trump administration’s “conscience act” exceeded the president’s authority but did not violate the Establishment Clause. Given its procedural defects, the rule was invalidated in its entirety. 

The Kentucky Supreme Court has ruled that an organization that sued Hands On Originals (“Hands On”), a t-shirt print company, for discrimination lacked standing as an “individual” to pursue the claim.

A California Court of Appeals has ruled that a religious hospital can be liable for discrimination if it refuses to provide medical services for religious reasons without immediately providing a referral to a hospital that will accommodate the patient.  

Commissioners on the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners were no doubt stunned when, on July 8, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit unanimously declared (Williamson v. Brevard County) that the commissioners’ practice of automatically denying atheists the opportunity to offer solemnizing invocations/reflections at the board’s meetings was “discriminatory,” “unconstitutional” and “must be rejected.”

An update on the status of Patterson v. Walgreen, New York expands statute of limitations on child sexual abuses case, ministerial exception in disability claims, and Sabbath accommodation

It is debatable whether a claim by a public school football coach that he is compelled by religious belief to pray at the 50-yard line following each game is a good vehicle for addressing either free exercise or workplace religious accommodation. However, it does appear that the four justices who signed onto Alito’s response have concerns about the chilling effect of Hardison and Smith on the ability to even raise Title VII religious accommodation and Free Exercise Clause claims. With Patterson v. Walgreen Co., the Supreme Court has the opportunity to revisit religious accommodation claims under Title VII.

Earlier today, California Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell) withdrew a bill that would have outlaws the sale of any service, including certain forms of advertising, that were intended to change an individual’s sexuality or gender identity. Assembly Bill 2943 had already passed the Assembly and Senate and was one vote away from the governor’s desk.

Attorneys for a Washington florist who refused to make a flower arrangement a same-sex wedding filed a supplemental brief in the wake of Monday’s Masterpiece Cakeshop decision which left the question of balance between free exercise of religion and non-discrimination statutes unanswered.