Article Title
Too Heavy a Burden: Testing Complicity-Based Claims Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2017
Publication Citation
92 Indiana Law Journal Supplement 40 (2017)
Abstract
This Note argues that courts ought to recognize, in the context of complicity-based claims under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a sound distinction between burdens on religious conduct, which enjoy protection, and burdens on mere religious sentiment. In light of the structure of complicity-based claims, such a distinction between conduct and sentiment is the only sound approach that respects the Act’s requirements. The Note reaches this conclusion through a survey of the various complicity-based challenges to the Health and Human Services contraceptive care mandate for religious non-profit employers under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act in the period between Burwell v. Hobby Lobby and Zubik v. Burwell.
Recommended Citation
Brooks, Kaleb
(2017)
"Too Heavy a Burden: Testing Complicity-Based Claims Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,"
Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 92:
Iss.
5, Article 3.
Available at:
https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol92/iss5/3