One very important question I have never seen discussed is the relationship between a state RFRA (say, Texas or Indiana) and a local anti-discrimination ordinance (say, San Antonio or Indianapolis) that covers public accommodations and protects the LGBT population. This is a common configuration; most RFRA states do NOT have state-wide LGBT laws re: public accommodations, but many have cities or counties with such laws. So, when the local wedding vendor refuses to sell to a same sex couple and is cited by the local Human Rights Commission for violating the public accommodations law, and the defense is state RFRA, how will the arguments play? Can a local law ever present a "compelling interest" sufficient to defeat a state religious freedom law? If not, the outcome of these conflicts is pre-ordained; the vendor will win. Or can the local interest be sufficiently compelling in that community to defeat the state RFRA defense? Does this depend on state-to-state generic principles of local government law?
All thoughts welcome. -- Ira C. Lupu F. Elwood & Eleanor Davis Professor of Law, Emeritus George Washington University Law School 2000 H St., NW Washington, DC 20052 (202)994-7053 Co-author (with Professor Robert Tuttle) of "Secular Government, Religious People" ( Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2014)) My SSRN papers are here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=181272#reg
_______________________________________________ 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.
