Law & the Courts

Protecting the First Amendment from the Supreme Court

(Photo Illustration: NRO)

Senator Mike Lee (R., Utah) has published a new and improved version of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), an essential piece of legislation that seeks to protect religious liberty in an increasingly hostile environment.

Drafting legislation is never easy, especially on this issue, given the treacherous new landscape created by the Supreme Court’s imposition of a supposed constitutional right to same-sex marriage. The original version of FADA elicited some vigorous criticisms — some in good faith, others perhaps less so.

Senator Lee’s new bill responds to many of these. The bill no longer has a catch-all provision that would forbid the federal government from “otherwise discriminat[ing]” against persons who believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. (The open-ended nature of that catch-all provision had invited a parade of horribles that, however far-fetched, was politically problematic.)

The new version has several express exclusions from the category of protected persons. Those exclusions clearly eliminate concerns that under the bill “federal workers could refuse to process the tax returns of same-sex couples,” as the New York Times worried in an editorial, or that hospitals could refuse care to someone in a same-sex marriage. In addition, “publicly traded for-profit entities” aren’t considered protected persons.

FADA would provide a safe harbor from the real threats to conscience that the progressive juggernaut on gay marriage poses.

FADA is so important because it would provide a safe harbor from the real threats to conscience that the progressive juggernaut on gay marriage poses. Among FADA’s modest aims: protect the tax-exempt status of entities that adhere to the belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman; protect individuals who hold the same belief about marriage that President Obama professed when he was elected from being deprived of eligibility for federal grants, licenses, and employment; and prevent colleges and schools from losing their accreditation because of their position on marriage.

#related#This doesn’t mean that the new version of the bill should necessarily be written in stone. Reasonable people of good will who care about religious liberty will have different judgments about how to resolve in principle the clashes between same-sex marriage and religious liberty, and such people will also have different prudential judgments about what is politically attainable. But those differences should be constructively worked out as the legislation makes its way to successful passage through Congress.

Finally, we hope that critics of any particular provisions in FADA will clarify whether or not they support its overarching goals. For those who don’t, it would seem that their real objections are to the American traditions of religious liberty and pluralism.

The Editors comprise the senior editorial staff of the National Review magazine and website.

Most Popular


Cold Brew’s Insidious Hegemony

Soon, many parts of the United States will be unbearably hot. Texans and Arizonans will be able to bake cookies on their car dashboards; the garbage on the streets of New York will be especially pungent; Washington will not only figuratively be a swamp. And all across America, coffee consumers will turn their ... Read More
National Security & Defense

The Warmonger Canard

Whatever the opposite of a rush to war is — a crawl to peace, maybe — America is in the middle of one. Since May 5, when John Bolton announced the accelerated deployment of the Abraham Lincoln carrier group to the Persian Gulf in response to intelligence of a possible Iranian attack, the press has been aflame ... Read More

Australia’s Voters Reject Leftist Ideas

Hell hath no fury greater than left-wingers who lose an election in a surprise upset. Think Brexit in 2016. Think Trump’s victory the same year. Now add Australia. Conservative prime minister Scott Morrison shocked pollsters and pundits alike with his victory on Saturday, and the reaction has been brutal ... Read More
NR Webathon

We’ve Had Bill Barr’s Back

One of the more dismaying features of the national political debate lately is how casually and cynically Attorney General Bill Barr has been smeared. He is routinely compared to Roy Cohn on a cable-TV program that prides itself on assembling the most thoughtful and plugged-in political analysts and ... Read More