Opinion ID: 90
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA)

Text: Under RFRA, the government cannot substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the government can show the rule is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that governmental interest. 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1. Newdow alleges the inscription of In God We Trust on coins and currency substantially burdens the free exercise of his religion in two primary ways. First, because Newdow's religion prohibits him from carrying currency that bears the motto In God We Trust, Newdow is impeded in his ability to engage in religious activities that require cash payments e.g., purchase of church attire, ingredients for the church libation The Freethink Drink, and books for the church library; travel for religious purposes to locations that require cash payments; and raise funds through cash donations. Second, because Newdow cannot entirely avoid using money in his daily life, the inscription of the motto on coins and currency forces him to violate a basic tenet of his religion and requires him to evangelize for a religious belief he expressly decries. The burdens Newdow contends are imposed by the motto rest on a single premise: the motto represents a purely religious dogma and constitutes a government endorsement of religion. [12] During oral argument, Newdow confirmed his RFRA claim is dependent on his contention that the national motto represents a religious dogma and constitutes governmental sponsorship of religion. Newdow further confirmed he does not claim his religious exercise would be burdened even if the motto were not a purely religious dogma. As a result, Newdow's RFRA claim is barred by Aronow. Although Aronow was an Establishment Clause challenge to the motto, and did not involve a RFRA claim, Aronow forecloses the central premise of Newdow's RFRA claim: the motto is a purely religious dogma and a government endorsement of religion. Aronow held the national motto is of a patriotic or ceremonial character, has no theological or ritualistic impact, and does not constitute governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise. Aronow, 432 F.2d at 243-44.