Written by Don ByrdFollowing Governor Steve Beshear’s veto of Kentucky’s version of a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Kentucky legislature has voted to override the move. The federal government and many states have enacted versions of the bill, which – in a nutshell – makes it tougher for the state to substantially infringe on religious exercise, by requiring a “compelling government interest.”
Written by Don ByrdKentucky Governor Steve Beshear cited the differences between recently passed legislation and the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act it is modeled after to explain his veto of the bill. House Bill 279 would raise the standard for the enforcement of generally applicable laws that substantially burden religious exercise.
Written by Don ByrdAdvocacy groups are pressuring Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear to veto a recently passed religious freedom bill. House Bill 279 is essentially a state version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which requires the state to demonstrate a compelling government interest to maintain a substantial burden on religious exercise. A dozen or so other states have similar provisions.
In a column this morning for the Lexington Herald-Leader, religion reporter Peter Smith notes research that suggests these laws have probably not been as helpful as its proponents argue, nor as troublesome as its detractors warn.
Written by Don ByrdAccording to the Kentucky Legislature website (and LegiScan), a religious freedom bill that recently passed the House was passed with Floor Amendment 2, which added one important word to the legislation: “substantial.” The version that came out of committee required a compelling government interest for any burden on religious exercise. Amendment 2 changed that, leaving that high level of scrutiny only for “substantial burdens” on religious exercise.