The LAST thing supporters of the Religious Liberty Protection Act want to see is more hearings. The stealth agenda to pass RLPA hits high gear and advocates of "special rights" for religious groups attempt to fast track this controversial and discriminatory legislation.

Web Posted: September 5, 1998

ith the Senate now back to business, the push is on to enact the Religious Liberty Protection Act (RLPA) now in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sources have provided AANEWS with information that shows a disturbing agenda on Capitol Hill to guarantee passage of the controversial legislation, if not in coming weeks then certainly at the beginning of the next session in January. Among the tactics being used:

   ¶    RLPA supporters are applying pressure to make sure that no further public hearings on the measure will be conducted. The House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution held three hearings (mostly stacked with religious groups praising the measure) with little notice and publicity. Their counterparts in the Senate have held only one. Word is that RLPA senate supporters fear that further hearings could only provide more time for opposition to RLPA to coalesce from a wide range of groups which have concerns about the measure. The "gag order" on further public hearings is designed to remove any barriers, and speed up passage of the Religious Liberty Protection Action through the legislative process.

   ¶    Behind the scenes both in the Senate and within the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion -- the ecumenical group which wrote the RLPA legislation -- there are howls of anguish at the compromise made recently by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Canady to win support (or at least the acquiescence) of Michael Farris and the home schooling movement. As detailed in earlier AANEWS dispatches, Canady and Farris had last-minute negotiations concerning RLPA prior to the recent congressional recess. Canady excised the "commerce clause" provision of RLPA which, fears Farris and others, treats churches as financial entities, and thus raises possible concerns over taxation of religious groups. The compromise version, though, still leaves in tact other crucial RLPA provisions, including the federalization clause (which "federalizes" any land use or zoning issues which arise in connection with religious organizations). In the Senate, Religious Liberty Protection Act boosters are threatening to ignore the House version and pass the complete RLPA as it was originally drafted by the Coalition. If approved, both versions would then head to a joint conference committee for rewrite and, hopefully, an act which the House and Senate could then agree on.

   ¶    The phrase is "fast track" when best describing the strategy to enact RLPA, especially with opposition beginning to gel. Constitutional law attorney Marci Hamilton has assembled a loose coalition of nearly thirty organizations which have signed-on to a "letter of concern" about the act, which is being presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee either today or early tomorrow. Dr. Hamilton successfully defended the City of Boerne, Texas in the historic challenge to RLPA predecessor, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in the BOERNE v. FLORES case. Possibly signing on to the "letter of concern" are representatives from advocacy organizations, preservationist groups, legal coalitions and more.

   ¶    A "mini-revolt" of sorts is brewing inside of the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the First Amendment groups which -- to our surprise -- has supported the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and RLPA. In Minnesota, there are reports of key ACLU people breaking ranks to oppose the RLPA. A source informed us that in several states, including New York, some key ACLU officials and supporters have protested to the national organization. "They're aghast over why ACLU is supporting the Religious Liberty Protection Act, but they aren't getting any response from national when they protest." One possible scenario here is state affiliates of the ACLU stepping up to lend their opposition to RLPA -- something which the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion definitely does not want to see.

   ¶    What's the best game plan for passage? Right now, RLPA supporters have to head off any clamor for more public hearings, and get on with a fast track agenda.

[text only]