State RFRAs question .:.

[A.E. Brownstein]

California does not have a state RFRA (but not for want of trying).  The CA 
Supreme Court so far has ducked the issue of whether it will interpret the 
state constitution to follow Smith or to provide more rigorous protection 
to free exercise rights (also, but not for want of trying).

Alan (often trying, seldom succeeding) Brownstein
UC Davis School of Law


At 03:55 PM 11/9/2004 -0500, you wrote:

>California has had several proposals, but I dont know the status of the bills.
>
>Marc Stern
>
>
>
>----------
>From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
>[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Menard, Richard H.
>Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 3:28 PM
>To: 'bluedog76 at gmail.com'; 'religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu'
>Subject: Re: State RFRAs question .:.
>
>
>
>I seem to recall Oregon had a bill pending.  Don't know the status.
>
>Richard Menard
>Sidley Austin Brown & Wood
>202-736-8016 (office)
>202-246-7408 (mobile)
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu <religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu>
>To: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu <religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu>
>Sent: Tue Nov 09 15:15:54 2004
>Subject: State RFRAs question  .:.
>
>I'm doing some research on state RFRAs and just thought I'd
>double-check here to see if anyone is aware of a state RFRA I might
>have missed (or of one which is not yet law but is near to enactment).
>  By my count, 13 states have passed statutory or constitutional RFRAs:
>
>Alabama
>Arizona
>Connecticut
>Florida
>Idaho
>Illinois
>Missouri
>New Mexico
>Oklahoma
>Pennsylvania
>Rhode Island
>South Carolina
>Texas
>
>Does anyone know of any other state RFRAs which are currently in
>effect or are expected to become law in the near future?
>
>Thanks,
>K. Anthony Laretto
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
><http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as 
>private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are 
>posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or 
>wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
>Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP mail server made the following annotations 
>on 11/09/2004, 02:31:48 PM
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is 
>privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
>delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us immediately.
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as 
>private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are 
>posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or 
>wrongly) forward the messages to others.