Religious liberty bill tries to stay one step ahead of Supreme Court

With religious liberty battles occurring across the country and a U.S. Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage coming any day now, two Republican lawmakers jointly proposed a bill this week to protect religious freedom at the federal level.

On Wednesday, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Rep. Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, introduced the First Amendment Defense Act, which would prevent federal agencies from denying funds and services—such as a tax-exempt status, certifications, grants, or contracts—to individuals, organizations, and small businesses because of their religious convictions, especially in regard to marriage.

“Our bill ensures that the federal government does not penalize Americans for following their religious beliefs or moral convictions on traditional marriage,” Labrador said. “Our bill shields against federal intrusion without taking anything away from anyone.”

Conservative groups have urged Congress to pass the bill, but, even with Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, the bill may face a tough road and a likely veto by President Barack Obama if it does pass.

Heritage Action for America spokesman Dan Holler sees the bill as a proactive step ahead of the Obergefell v. Hodges decision by the Supreme Court, which could require all 50 states to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

He told me he believes that GOP lawmakers have been reluctant to engage in the religious liberty conversation, but added, “This [bill] will be the logical place for Republicans to turn.”

Conservative lawmakers and advocacy groups fear a Supreme Court decision in favor of same-sex marriage will lead to federal restrictions on business licenses, the loss of tax-exemptions for religious schools and organizations, and a host of other issues.

“No person or nonprofit should lose tax-exempt status, face disqualification, lose a professional license, or be punished by the federal government simply for believing what President Obama believed just three years ago, that marriage is the union of a man and a woman,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council (FRC).

In a February poll commissioned by FRC, 81 percent of respondents agreed with the statement, “Government should leave people free to follow their beliefs about marriage as they live their daily lives at work and in the way they run their businesses.” Sixty-one percent of the poll’s participants also believed that states and citizens—not the Supreme Court—should decide on the definition of marriage.

“The vast majority of Americans today still hold a robust view of religious liberty, yet across the country the right of conscience is threatened by state and local governments that coerce, intimidate, and penalize individuals, associations, and businesses who believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman,” Lee said. “The First Amendment Defense Act is necessary to ensure that this kind of government excess never occurs at the federal level.”