Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The grocer sued but, instead of alleging violations of the broader Constitution of Washington, its attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom and the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty only filed under the Free Exercise Clause of the United States Constitution. [16] The case is known as Stormans, Inc. v. Wiesman.
The school vaccination requirement was put in place after the compulsory school attendance law caused a rapid increase in the number of children in public schools, increasing the risk of smallpox outbreaks. The early movement towards school vaccination laws began at the local level including counties, cities, and boards of education.
(The Center Square) – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-TX, is leading an effort to reverse actions taken against military service members through a U.S. Department of Defense COVID-19 vaccine mandate ...
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488 (November 16, 1993), codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb through 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-4 (also known as RFRA, pronounced "rifra" [1]), is a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected."
As workers throughout the U.S. rally against COVID-19 vaccine mandates, the federal agency charged with preventing workplace discrimination has updated its guidance on how employers should ...
The assistant manager at Hank’s Furniture store in Pensacola told her boss “she had no plans” to get the vaccine, as her religious beliefs wouldn’t “allow” it, and asked for a ...
The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), Pub. L. 106–274 (text), codified as 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq., is a United States federal law that protects individuals, houses of worship, and other religious institutions from discrimination in zoning and landmarking laws. [1]
The archbishop brought suit, challenging the ruling under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993. Flores argued that the Boerne, Texas, congregation had outgrown the existing structure, rendering the ruling a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion without a compelling state interest. [3]