Do No Harm Act

To amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to protect civil rights and otherwise prevent meaningful harm to third parties, and for other purposes. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Do No Harm Act 2. Sense of Congress It is the sense of Congress that— (1) the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 should not be interpreted to authorize an exemption from generally applicable law that imposes the religious views, habits, or practices of one party upon another; (2) the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 should not be interpreted to authorize an exemption from generally applicable law that imposes meaningful harm, including dignitary harm, on a third party; and (3) the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 should not be interpreted to authorize an exemption that permits discrimination against other persons, including persons who do not belong to the religion or adhere to the beliefs of those to whom the exemption is given. 3. Exception from application of Act where Federal law prevents harm to others Section 3 of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ( 42 U.S.C. 2000bb–1 (d) Additional exception from application of Act where Federal law prevents harm to others This section does not apply— (1) to any provision of law or its implementation that provides for or requires— (A) protections against discrimination or the promotion of equal opportunity including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family Medical Leave Act, Executive Order 11246, the Violence Against Women Act, and Equal Access to Housing in HUD Programs Regardless of Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity (77 FR 5662); (B) employers to provide wages, other compensation, or benefits including leave, or standards protecting collective activity in the workplace; (C) protections against child labor, abuse, or exploitation; or (D) access to, information about, referrals for, provision of, or coverage for, any health care item or service; (2) to any term requiring goods, services, functions, or activities to be performed or provided to beneficiaries of a government contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other award; or (3) to the extent that application would result in denying a person the full and equal enjoyment of a good, service, benefit, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation, provided by the government. . 4. Clarification of preclusion of litigation between private parties (a) Purpose The purpose of the amendment made by subsection (b) is to clarify the applicability of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, as enacted. (b) Preclusion Section 3(c) of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ( 42 U.S.C. 2000bb–1(c) judicial proceeding judicial proceeding to which the government is a party and obtain appropriate relief against that government. 5. Definitions Section 5 of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ( 42 U.S.C. 2000bb–2 (1) in paragraph (3), by striking and (2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period and inserting ; and (3) by adding at the end the following: (5) the term including .

Summary: Do No Harm Act This bill prohibits the application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) to specified federal laws or the implementation of such laws. Currently, RFRA prohibits the government from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest when using the least restrictive means. Under the bill, RFRA is inapplicable to laws or the implementation of laws that protect against discrimination or the promotion of equal opportunity (e.g., the Civil Rights Act of 1964); require employers to provide wages, other compensation, or benefits, including leave; protect collective activity in the workplace; protect against child labor, abuse, or exploitation; or provide for access to, information about, referrals for, provision of, or coverage for, any health care item or service. The bill prevents RFRA from being used to deny (1) goods or services the government has contracted, granted, or made an agreement to provide to a beneficiary; or (2) a person's full and equal enjoyment of a government-provided good, service, benefit, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation. In order for a person to assert a RFRA claim or defense in a judicial proceeding, the government must be a party to the proceeding.