Chris Lund writes:
It's also important to keep in mind that the protection of state RFRAs can
always be legislatively narrowed-and that has happened. Concerned with a
pending suit by a Muslim to claim a drivers' license without having to take off
her headscarf, Florida statutorily (and retroactively) removed such claims from
the protection of Florida's RFRA. Judging by Florida's reaction to it, that
apparently is the most threatening state RFRA claim that has ever been brought.
I leave it to the listserv to evaluate how bad it really is, but it is
certainly less scary than what Measure 3 opponents feared.
I think the opportunity for legislative narrowing is a critical
argument in favor of state RFRAs - but wouldn't that have at least been
somewhat harder with Measure 3, which would have been a state constitutional
amendment and not a state statute?
_______________________________________________
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.
