SF 508 (LSB 1099SV (2) 88)

SENATE FILE 508

BY  COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

(SUCCESSOR TO SF 240)

A BILL FOR

An Act relating to the standard of judicial review and providing a claim or defense when a state action burdens a person’s exercise of religion, and including effective date provisions.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA:

    Section 1.  NEW SECTION.  675.1  Short title.
   This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act”.
    Sec. 2.  NEW SECTION.  675.2  Legislative purpose and intent.
   The purpose and intent of this chapter is all of the following:
   1.  To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where the free exercise of religion is substantially burdened by state action. 
   2.  That this chapter be interpreted consistent with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. §2000bb et seq., federal case law, and federal jurisprudence. 
   3.  To provide a claim or defense to a person whose exercise of religion is substantially burdened by state action.
    Sec. 3.  NEW SECTION.  675.3  Definitions.
   As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
   1.  “Demonstrates” means meets the burdens of going forward with the evidence and of persuasion.
   2.  “Exercise of religion” means the practice or observance of religion, including any action that is motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the exercise is compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.
   3.  “Government” includes a branch, department, agency, instrumentality, political subdivision, official, or other person acting under color of law of the state. 
   4.  “State law” includes without limitation a law, ordinance, or resolution of a political subdivision. 
    Sec. 4.  NEW SECTION.  675.4  Free exercise of religion protected. 
   1.  Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless it is demonstrated that applying the burden to that person’s exercise of religion is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. 
   2.  A person whose exercise of religion has been burdened in violation of this chapter may assert such violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding and obtain appropriate relief. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this chapter shall be governed by the general rules of standing under state and federal law. 
    Sec. 5.  NEW SECTION.  675.5  Applicability.
   This chapter applies to all state and local laws and the implementation of state and local laws, whether statutory or otherwise, and whether adopted before, on, or after the effective date of this Act.
    Sec. 6.  EFFECTIVE UPON ENACTMENT.  This Act, being deemed of immediate importance, takes effect upon enactment.
EXPLANATION
The inclusion of this explanation does not constitute agreement with
the explanation’s substance by the members of the general assembly.
   This bill relates to the standard of judicial review when a state action burdens a person’s exercise of religion.
   Under current law, a court is not required to apply heightened scrutiny when reviewing a law that burdens a person’s exercise of religion when such law is generally applicable. The bill provides that a court shall apply the compelling interest test set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) in such cases, so that state action cannot substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion unless it is demonstrated that applying the law of general applicability is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that interest. The bill provides that a person whose exercise of religion has been burdened by state action may assert such violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding.
   The bill takes effect upon enactment.