Opinion ID: 1324254
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Majority's Misstatements of the Law under RFRA

Text: The majority misstates the law under RFRA in three ways. First, it concludes that a substantial burden on the exercise of religion under RFRA occurs only when the government has coerced the Plaintiffs to act contrary to their religious beliefs under threat of sanctions, or conditioned a governmental benefit upon conduct that would violate the Plaintiffs' religious beliefs. Maj. op. at 1063. Second, it ignores the impact of RLUIPA, and cases interpreting RLUIPA, on the definition of a substantial burden on the exercise of religion in RFRA. Third, it treats as an open question whether RFRA applies to the federal government's use of its own land. I discuss these misstatements in turn.