(Fwd from Marci Hamilton) re: Hearings on RLPA

[Volokh, Eugene]

> From: Hamilton02 at aol.com
> Received: from Hamilton02 at aol.com
>       by imo11.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v23.6.) id jLDBa14352 (4590)
>        for <conlawprof at listserv.ucla.edu>; Mon, 4 Oct 1999 08:38:34 -0400
> (EDT)
> Subject: Hearings on RLPA
> To: conlawprof at listserv.ucla.edu
>
> Bill Funk is curious about the hearings on RLPA before the Senate
> Judiciary
> Committee.  RLPA employs RFRA's strict scrutiny (incl. least restrictive
> means) under the Commerce and Spending Clauses and under Section 5 in a
> provision aimed at local land use laws.  As usual, Sen. Hatch stacked the
> hearings with those sympathetic to the RLPA formulation.  Prof. Laycock,
> along with other members of the Coalition for the Free Exercise of
> Religion,
> told the Committee RLPA has no constitutional problems.  Chai Feldblum did
>
> testify that it was troubling vis-a-vis antidiscrimination laws and may
> not
> be constitutional under its commerce and spending powers.  But she, along
> with the rest of the panel, was sanguine about the land-use-only Sec. 3 of
>
> the bill.  When Sen. Specter insisted that I testify, Sen. Hatch's
> response
> was that I was "opposed to the bill and too effective."  If you're
> interestd
> in an analysis of RLPA's constitutional defects, Sen. Leahy introduced my
> testimony into the record.
>
> Now that a number of the liberal, or moderate, members of the Coalition
> have
> withdrawn support, the bill is unlikely to go anywhere as it now stands.
> There is talk, though, about the possibility of a land-use-only bill.
> That
> portion of the bill suffers from RFRA's problems, i.e., a lack of evidence
>
> (other than isolated anecdotes) of widespread unconstitutional conduct by
> land use authorities.  Under Boerne and the 11th Am. cases last spring
> clarifying Boerne, the evidence is not adequate.
>
>
> Marci A. Hamilton
> Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law
> Emory University School of Law
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/19991004/5d270975/attachment.htm