[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1308 Introduced in House (IH)]
103d CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1308
To protect the free exercise of religion.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 11, 1993
Mr. Schumer (for himself, Mr. Cox, Mr. Nadler, Mrs. Maloney, Mr.
Gilman, Mr. Moran, Mr. Lewis of Georgia, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Washington,
Mr. Cooper, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Yates, Mrs. Meek, Mr.
Kopetski, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. Deutsch, Mr. Price of North Carolina, Mr.
Swift, Ms. Shepherd, Mr. Towns, Mrs. Morella, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Frank of
Massachusetts, Mr. Berman, Mr. Edwards of California, Ms. Byrne, Ms.
Pelosi, Mr. Sundquist, Mr. Bryant, Mr. Hutchinson, Mrs. Unsoeld, Ms.
Molinari, Mr. Hall of Ohio, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. Hastings, Mr. Gutierrez,
Mr. Weldon, Mr. Gordon, Mr. Spratt, Mr. Sawyer, Mr. Andrews of New
Jersey, Mr. Rush, Mr. Lehman, Mr. Glickman, Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Johnston
of Florida, Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut, Mr. Matsui, Mr. Owens, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Porter, Mr. Jefferson, Ms. Eshoo, Mr.
Herger, Mr. Saxton, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. McHale, Mr. Sanders, Ms.
Waters, Mr. Wynn, Mr. Thornton, Mr. Neal of North Carolina, Mr. Wyden,
Ms. Margolies-Mezvinsky, Mr. Lantos, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Levy, Mr.
Studds, Mr. Linder, Mr. Blackwell, Mr. Mineta, Mr. Payne of New Jersey,
Ms. McKinney, Mr. Torricelli, Mr. Knollenberg, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Sabo,
Mr. Barrett of Wisconsin, Mr. Machtley, Mr. Sisisky, Mr. Torres, Mr.
Dellums, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Stark, Mr. Shays, Mr. Scott, Mr.
Frost, Mr. Levin, Mr. Filner, Mr. Pete Geren of Texas, Mr. Strickland,
Mr. Fingerhut, Mr. Hochbrueckner, Mr. Gejdenson, Mr. Franks of
Connecticut, Mr. Goodlatte, Mr. Houghton, Mr. Lightfoot, Mr. Schiff,
Mr. Talent, Mr. Beilenson, Mrs. Lowey, Mr. Hansen, Ms. DeLauro, Mr.
Mfume, Mr. Hoyer, Ms. Norton, Mr. Orton, Mr. Gunderson, Mr. Williams,
Mr. Hamburg, Mr. Klein, Mr. Dicks, Mr. Stump, Mr. Evans, Mr. Skaggs,
Mr. Stokes, Mrs. Collins of Illinois, Ms. Velazquez, Mr. Vento, Mr.
Gene Green of Texas, Mr. Andrews of Maine, Mr. Bacchus of Florida, Mr.
Fazio, Mr. Coppersmith, Mrs. Kennelly, Mr. Derrick, Mr. Swett, Mr.
Lazio, Mrs. Fowler, Mr. Franks of New Jersey, Mr. Ravenel, Mr. McKeon,
and Mr. Gallo) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary
May 11, 1993
Additional sponsors: Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Coleman, Mr.
Meehan, Ms. Lambert, Mr. Gingrich, Mr. King, Mr. Kreidler, Mr. Zimmer,
Mr. Hoekstra, Mr. Jacobs, Mr. Sangmeister, Mr. Skelton, Mr. McMillan,
Mr. Grandy, Mr. Dickey, Mr. Istook, Ms. Schenk, Mr. Leach, Mr.
Applegate, Mr. Slattery, Mr. Dornan, Mr. Wheat, Mr. Roemer, Mr. Dreier,
Mr. Bartlett of Maryland, Mr. Tucker, Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of
Texas, Mr. Olver, Mr. Flake, Mr. Payne of Virginia, Ms. Danner, Mr.
Hobson, and Mr. Johnson of Georgia
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To protect the free exercise of religion.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Religious Freedom Restoration Act of
1993''.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds--
(1) the framers of the American Constitution, recognizing
free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its
protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) laws ``neutral'' toward religion may burden religious
exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious
exercise;
(3) governments should not burden religious exercise
without compelling justification;
(4) in Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith the Supreme
Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government
justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral
toward religion; and
(5) the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert
v. Verner and Wisconsin v. Yoder is a workable test for
striking sensible balances between religious liberty and
competing governmental interests.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in
Federal court cases before Employment Division of Oregon v.
Smith and to guarantee its application in all cases where free
exercise of religion is burdened; and
(2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose
religious exercise is burdened by government.
SEC. 3. FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION PROTECTED.
(a) In General.--Government shall not burden a person's exercise of
religion even if the burden results from a rule of general
applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Exception.--Government may burden a person's exercise of
religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the
person--
(1) furthers a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that
compelling governmental interest.
(c) Judicial Relief.--A person whose religious exercise has been
burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a
claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief
against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this
section shall be governed by the general rules of standing under
article III of the Constitution.
SEC. 4. ATTORNEYS FEES.
(a) Judicial Proceedings.--Section 722 of the Revised Statutes of
the United States (42 U.S.C. 1988) is amended by inserting ``the
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993,'' before ``or title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964''.
(b) Administrative Proceedings.--Section 504(b)(1)(C) of title 5,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii);
(2) by striking the semicolon at the end of clause (iii)
and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by inserting ``(iv) the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act of 1993'' after clause (iii).
SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act--
(1) the term ``government'' includes a branch, department,
agency, instrumentality, and official (or other person acting
under color of law) of the United States, a State, or a
subdivision of a State;
(2) the term ``State'' includes the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each territory and
possession of the United States;
(3) the term ``demonstrates'' means meets the burdens of
going forward with the evidence and of persuasion; and
(4) the term ``exercise of religion'' means exercise of
religion under the first article of amendment to the
Constitution of the United States.
SEC. 6. APPLICABILITY.
(a) In General.--This Act applies to all Federal and State law, and
the implementation of that law, whether statutory or otherwise, and
whether adopted before or after the enactment of this Act.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Federal statutory law adopted after the
date of the enactment of this Act is subject to this Act unless such
law explicitly excludes such application by reference to this Act.
(c) Religious Belief Unaffected.--Nothing in this Act shall be
construed to authorize any government to burden any religious belief.
SEC. 7. ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE UNAFFECTED.
(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect,
interpret, or in any way address that portion of the First Amendment
prohibiting laws respecting the establishment of religion. Granting
government funding, benefits, or exemptions, to the extent permissible
under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, shall not
constitute a violation of this Act.
(b) Definition.--As used in this section, the term ``granting
government funding, benefits, or exemptions'' does not include a denial
of government funding, benefits, or exemptions.
<all>