Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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."
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), is a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected."
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), as originally passed by Congress in 1993 with bipartisan support, was designed to protect the people from the government imposing its will on an ...
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]
The best means of protecting religious freedom is to provide concrete protections for practices and professions, Deborah A. O’Malley writes.
Indiana Senate Bill 101, titled the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), [1] is a law in the U.S. state of Indiana, which allows individuals and companies to assert as a defense in legal proceedings that their exercise of religion has been, or is likely to be, substantially burdened.
The plaintiffs argued that the rule violated protections for religious freedom under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment and a federal law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Also in 1993, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which sought to restore the general applicability of the "compelling interest" standard present prior to Employment Division v. Smith. However, in City of Boerne v.