Bold challenge to a law on religion
Arguing that Congress has gone too far to push aside the Supreme Courts constitutional role in religion cases, a loose coalition of child welfare organizations, survivors of clergy child sexual abuse, and non-believers has urged the Justices to strike down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act when it rules on a new dispute over the federal health care law.
The amicus brief, written by a prominent academic authority on religion and the law, Cardozo Law Schools Marci A. Hamilton, seeks to add a bold new dimension to the Courts review of the Affordable Care Acts contraception mandate.
RFRA, the document contended, is Congresss overt attempt to take . . . over this Courts role in interpreting the Constitution. . . . [T]his novel federal statute, which is one of the most aggressive attacks on this Courts role in constitutional interpretation in history, has fomented culture wars in the courts like the one ignited in the pending cases by for-profit businesses seeking a RFRA-based exemption from the mandate to provide health insurance for pregnancy-related services to workers.
The intense passions about religious freedom and womens reproductive health in this case have obscured the issue that should be decided before this Court reaches the merits: RFRA is unconstitutional, the brief argued. The filing represents the views of seven organizations, telling the Court that they are united in their concern that RFRA endangers the vulnerable who otherwise would be protected by the neutral, generally applicable laws of this country.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/01/bold-challenge-to-a-law-on-religion/#more-204592