Given that RFRA was a response to a decision that dealt with drug use, it seems unlikely that it never crossed Congress’ collective mind that the Act would be applied in cases involving drugs. But even if your point about post hoc justification were true, then it seems equally post-hoc to use the allegedly grave threat RFRA poses to children as a tug-on-the-heart-string argument against RFRA now that constitutional arguments have been rejected. Moreover, if there is actual evidence of danger to children as extraordinary as you claim in a specific case, there’s little reason to think that courts will not be able to sensibly apply RFRA to take account of that interest.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Read the legislative history behind RFRA from beginning to end -- the administration of illegal drugs to children by religious groups is not there. It is a wholesale reconstruction of history to believe that Congress considered the issue in any way, shape, or form. The vast majority, i.e., over 95%, of the legislative history involves castigating the Supreme Court for Smith. The practical consequences of RFRA were never approached, because Congress's purpose was to reverse a Supreme Court decision, without any meaningful consideration of what that would accomplish at a policy level. Now, there are post hoc justifications for RFRA proffered all around, but they do not displace what Congress actually considered and actually knew at the time it was enacted.
As to policy choices, it is my view that RFRA is unsound constitutionally and policy-wise, but the latter does not undermine the former.
And, yes, the placement of a drug on Schedule I does, indeed, end the discussion when the drug is being administered to minors. The fact the drugs were delivered in a religious context does not change the extraordinary interest of the children.
Marci
In a message dated 2/23/2006 2:36:19 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.