ive members of the coalition promoting the Religious Liberty Protection Act have announced that they can no longer support the proposed legislation in its current form, and have withdrawn from that organization. The Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism, the Anti-Defamation League, the National Council of Jewish Women, the National Council of Churches and the Baptist Joint Committee cite both practical and ideological reasons behind their move.

   As noted in yesterday's AANEWS, at least a dozen organizations are set to drop out of the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion, an ecumenical interest group which crafted the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and its successor, the Religious Liberty Protection Act. The measures require government to use a "compelling interest/least restrictive means" test when dealing with faith-based groups and practices. The Coalition wrote the RFRA legislation in response to what it charged was a pattern of increasing government laws and judicial rulings which restricted the free exercise of religion. Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993, but four years later the legislation was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in the historic BOERNE v. FLORES case. Justices ruled that RFRA was an unconstitutional extension of congressional authority; Justice John Paul Stevens opined that the act violated the separation of church and state by providing religious groups with a legal instrument which "no atheist" could hope to obtain.

   The Religious Liberty Protection Act was introduced after the BOERNE decision. Earlier this year, the House approved its version of RLPA, but the measure has stalled in the Senate. A number of civil rights organizations including American Atheists, along with child welfare advocates, historic preservation groups and others, have been warning legislators that RLPA has serious constitutional and legal problems, and may not survive a court challenge. Dr. Marci Hamilton, constitutional attorney and a leading critic of the Religious Liberty Protection Act, says that the measure also has "unintended consequences" which could affect everything from land use and environmental laws to prison security and the investigation of child abuse involving religious sects.

   The American Civil Liberties Union was first to bolt the Coalition, when it announced recently that it could not support a version of RLPA that permitted churches and other religious groups to use the statute to trump civil rights and anti-discrimination laws. Under RLPA, landlords, employers and others could grill applicants on their lifestyle and religious beliefs, and use that to deny jobs, rental and other services. In debate over the RLPA, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, an early supporter of the measure, warned: "RLPA should be a shield for the religious liberty of all -- not a sword against the civil rights of some."

   In the past week, representatives of civil rights organizations and health care groups have "worked the halls" of the Senate office buildings pointing out the possible problems with the legislation. The growing awareness of RLPA -- something that was conspicuously absent in the earlier debates over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act -- has also edged a number of key legislators away from backing the measure. Mark Pelavin of the Religious Action Center told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency news service earlier this week that his group has withdrawn its support for RLPA out of political expediency, and concern over what the JTA described as the "contentious debate on the issue in the Senate." Pelavin added that from his perspective, there was "no realistic chance of this bill being passed this year," and that "any debate would be a bruising one."

   The Anti-Defamation League has bolted the ecumenical Coalition over fears that RLPA could endanger civil rights statutes, but says that it will work on other legislation to protect religious liberty. ADL may reportedly support a revised RLPA that subjects churches and other religious groups to coverage of anti-discrimination laws, but allows faith based sects to be protected in matters such as zoning ordinances, autopsies and prisoner's rights. Michael Lehman, Washington legal counsel for the ADL, added that paradoxically the group will continue to support state-level versions of the measure.

   Given the shakeup inside of the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion, the question now on capitol is whether the RLPA can clear the Senate. Majority Leader Trent Lott has arranged for the measure to be held "at the desk," which means that even before further hearings and a tally inside of the Senate Judiciary Committee, RLPA can be fast-tracked for a full vote on the Senate floor. As reported yesterday, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a major supporter of the Religious Liberty Protection Act, is reportedly concerned about some of the legal fine-points of the measure. According to Marc Stern of the Anti-Defamation League, with the fracture inside of the Coalition "it's more complicated now and conceivably impossible" for RLPA to clear the Senate. "One of the great strengths of the coalition," Stern added, "was its very breadth." As groups like ADL and the Baptists jump ship, "the coalition has lurched politically in terms of people's impressions, way off to the right..."

[text only]