The Indianapolis Star reports <http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/12/10/conservative-groups-lawsuit-says-rfra-fix-unconstitutional/77102680/>that "Two conservative groups filed a lawsuit Thursday afternoon challenging the constitutionality of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act "fix" and local nondiscrimination ordinances in Indianapolis and Carmel." Here is the complaint <http://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/files/ifi-carmel/filed-complaint.pdf> . The argument is quite complicated. I see this as more of a political statement than a serious lawsuit . In political terms, it implicitly endorses S B 100, the Indiana Senate Republicans' proposed anti-discrimination/religious accommodation law, for preempting local human rights ordinances. In the plaintiffs’ view religious conservatives need protection from cities and counties that would infringe upon their religious liberty . At the same time, the lawsuit implicitly criticizes SB 100 for not doing enough to protect religious conservatives: it fails to exempt organizations (profit or nonprofit) that object to same-sex relations on religious grounds but which are not churches or church-affiliated religious or that have four or more employees.
Robert Katz Professor of Law Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law
_______________________________________________ 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.
