Texas lawmakers approve Pastor Protection Bill

UPDATE: On Thursday afternoon, the Texas House passed the Pastor Protection Bill with a 141-2 vote, a vindication for religious liberty advocates who argued the issue of conscience transcended political lines and deserved public debate.

Pastors from across the state who lobbied legislators throughout the session for a total of 10 religious liberty bills applauded yesterday’s vote but called it only a small step in a larger battle against religious liberties. The bill, which protects pastors from being sued for refusing to officiate same-sex weddings, is scheduled for a third and final reading Friday. Once passed by the House, Gov. Greg Abbott said he would sign it, putting the measure into immediate effect.

OUR EARLIER REPORT (May 21, 2 p.m.): AUSTIN, Texas—Religious liberty advocates are seeing red over the lack of support for bills they thought would, at the very least, get a hearing in what is often touted as one of the most politically conservative states in the union. But as the 84th session of the Texas Legislature winds down, only one religious freedom bill remains alive—the others died with little to no debate.

At least nine bills giving legal protection to clergy and citizens, and asserting states’ rights on the issue of marriage, have fallen by the wayside. And with similar legislation having mixed success in other states, religious liberty advocates are concerned about legal challenges in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage expected in June. Without legal protection from the state, a high court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide could land religious objectors in court.

That has Texas Rep. Matt Krause, the son and grandson of Baptist pastors, anxious and frustrated.

“I think a spotlight is being shined on Texas,” the Ft. Worth attorney said. “We have 20 days and Texas hasn’t even had a discussion on religious liberty.”

Krause picked up the mantel of a house resolution calling for a Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (RFRA) constitutional amendment. Texas has had a RFRA statute for 16 years, but a constitutional amendment would be harder for future legislatures to overturn. The original House resolution—with a similar measure filed in the Senate—was dropped by its author after LGBT activists convinced the Texas Association of Businesses (TAB) to oppose it and all other legislation establishing a defense for Texans who oppose same-sex marriage based on their religious convictions.

In March, TAB President Mike Wallace touted the RFRA-equals-discrimination argument and pointed to last year’s uproar in Arizona over legislation that would have provided a defense for business owners who refused to service same-sex weddings based on religious objections. Wallace said having a public discussion could harm the Texas economy.

Krause balked at that assertion. The state’s economic success, what he called “the Texas miracle,” has happened with the existing RFRA statute in place.

Then Indiana faced a national backlash over its newly enacted RFRA statute.

The furor over that state’s RFRA bill put the fear of big corporate losses in the hearts of legislators across the nation. Foreseeing similar protests on the Texas Capitol steps, legislators backed away from their offerings and Republican state leadership declined to champion the bills, much to the dismay of their supporters.

“[Indiana] did taint the conversation. We couldn’t even get a hearing,” said Krause of his legislation. “I was hoping to add to the national debate.”

Similar discussions were quashed in Louisiana on Tuesday when its legislature failed to pass the Marriage and Conscience Act out of committee in spite of a poll commissioned by the Family Research Council indicating two-thirds of Louisianans supported the bill. Later that afternoon, Gov. Bobby Jindal signed an executive order which effectively, if only temporarily, implements the measure.

The order can be repealed by a subsequent governor.

But in the meantime, it puts into place what Cindy Asmussen, ethics and religious liberty advisor for the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention, calls a “layer of protection” for citizens, clergy, businesses, and ministries caught up in a likely wave of litigation.

As in Louisiana, the Texas RFRA statute provides broad religious liberty protection but not the specificity needed in a post-marriage culture.

“The other side would have to litigate through that extra layer of law,” she told me. “That’s all we were asking for.”

The lone measure still alive in Texas, Senate Bill 2065, is scheduled for House debate today. Under the so-called Pastor Protection Bill, pastors, churches, and their affiliates cannot be compelled to perform or facilitate marriages that “violate a sincerely held religious belief.” Refusal to provide services cannot be used as a basis for a civil or criminal legal action or loss of tax-exempt status.

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin signed a similar bill May 1.

“For the time being I think they will be safe,” Krause said, in the event the Texas bill dies. “Churches have a protected place in jurisprudence.”

But in two to three years? Krause couldn’t say.

Some Texas legislators hold out hope previously failed religious liberty bills might find new life as amendments to other legislation. Rep. Scott Sanford, a Southern Baptist pastor and former business owner, authored a bill protecting faith-based adoption agencies from litigation should they refuse to place children with same-sex couples. It failed in committee, and Sanford’s attempt to attach the measure to another bill governing child welfare agencies failed May 18 on a procedural error. The entire bill with two other amendments went back to committee.

It must be voted out of committee by Sunday, May 24 or it will die as well.