Democracy and Religious Freedom

How can the Supreme Court blast a huge hole through the institutions of both democracy and religious freedom at the same time? Simply observe the Court's recent decision in the City of Boerne v. Flores case and the answer becomes frighteningly clear.

In Boerne, the Court decided 6-3 that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act(RFRA) was unconstitutional. Specifically, the Court ruled that religious persecution was not "widespread" enough for Congress to have the power to enact such a statute.

Widespread enough? How could six judicially savvy individuals be so unenlightened? After all, it was through RFRA that I observed these successes:

--A young California girl was not censored from singing a religious song at a talent show;
--A church in Oregon was prevented from being closed down through burdensome permit fees; and
--A gospel mission in Salt Lake City was kept from being shut down through an arbitrary zoning ordinance.

To understand the depth of the Court's broad attack on both our religious liberty as well as our elected Congress, we have to look at why RFRA was necessary in the first place.

Back in 1990, the Supreme Court stripped the First Amendment's religious freedom protection by declaring that government could substantially burden religious freedom through laws not clearly targeted at religion. Therefore, a state law forbidding distribution of alcoholic beverages to minors could be used to prohibit a church from allowing anyone under 21 to participate in communion services using wine as a sacrament.

Unthinkable? Well, in reality, California already has such a law which, on its face, provides no exemption for church communion services. Hence, religious persons and institutions are sitting ducks for arbitrary majoritarian attack under the Court's civil-liberty-shattering decision.

However, before you become too discouraged, remember that the battle for religious freedom is by no means over. Individual states can still pass RFRA-like statutes. The protections of state constitutions may be applied as well. In addition, cases may still be brought before the Supreme Court to compel the Court to overturn their original 1990 decision.

For such strategic counter-attacks to occur, there must be an effective network of trained and committed attorneys willing to accept this important challenge.

I have good news! Recently, a California-based legal organization was formed, called PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE. This is a nonprofit organization committed to defending religious freedom, family rights, and other important civil liberties, without charge to the client.

With the Court's recent decision to toss out RFRA, defending individuals and ministries has surely become much more difficult. PACIFIC JUSTICE is the only California-based organization with a unique network of hundreds of attorneys and concerned citizens all over the state ready to rise to the challenge. Over the last two months alone, our PACIFIC JUSTICE office has been referred a dozen pre-litigation cases!

Whatever the Court may decide, PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE'S resolve remains undeterred: churches must not be unreasonably burdened, public school children must not be harassed for their faith, and dynamic missions must not be zoned out of existence.

If you know of someone in need of legal defense, or if you are interested in becoming a crucial part of our PACIFIC JUSTICE team, please call us at (916) 857-6900.