Religious Freedom Restoration Act

• Utah is not the only state that has faced complaints about the age-inappropriate content of the Bible in response to book bans.
• In June 2023, a Florida rabbi, Barry Silver, compiled a list of Bible verses that he argues contains violence and sex.
• That move came after state education Superintendent Ryan Walters called for a ban on LGBTQ+ books, while arguing the Bible should be taught in government-funded public schools.
• Such attempts to ban the Bible based on book ban laws are examples of a protest strategy called “uncivil obedience.”

A different approach to protest

• Uncivil obedience is the opposite of the more commonly known protest strategy of civil disobedience, which entails breaking the law in surprisingly respectful ways.
• Uncivil obedience, on the other hand, involves following the law but in ways that disregard people’s expectations.
• Uncivil obedience has been used to challenge the practicality and fairness of laws and processes.

Conservative Christians step to the plate

• A federal law passed in 1993 called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act has often been at the center of religious strategists embracing uncivil obedience.
• A common argument proponents use is that the law protects conservative Christian business owners and employees who view recognizing same-sex marriage or providing contraception as a violation of their religious beliefs.
• Opponents view the conservative embrace of the idea of religious freedom as a bizarre interpretation of the law, arguing that they are using it for the purpose of justifying discrimination based on religious beliefs.

Progressive groups turn the tables

• Now, progressive groups are increasingly using religious freedom arguments, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, to justify exemptions from conservative policies.
• Most recently, progressive Christian clergy members, Jews, Muslims, Satanists and other religious plaintiffs have begun to file lawsuits in states challenging strict abortion bans.
• In religious freedom debates, these disputes are at the heart of a crucial question: where to establish the legal limits of religious freedom.

Even failure can become a victory

• When conservatives lose religious freedom cases, they can claim such losses reflect bias against conservative Christian religious beliefs.
• Yet it still allows people to draw attention to social issues in unprecedented ways that can spark public discussion.
• Uncivil obedience tactics can draw immense criticism from the public, who may view such tactics as manipulative or disingenuous.

• Feds for Med Freedom et al.
• According to the filing, plaintiffs "were persecuted and harassed for their beliefs; they were shamed, 'outed,' segregated, ostracized and excluded.
• "These are experienced, dedicated and in some cases decorated military personnel and employees," said Feds for Medical Freedom President Marcus Thornton.
• Other lawsuits filed by Feds for Med Freedom in 2023 include Feds for Med Freedom et al v. Merrick Garland et al and Feds for Medical Freedom v. Antony Blinken et al .

• 23-0365) against the federally funded National Archives Museum because the National Archives targeted and censored its religious, pro-life visitors on January 20, 2023 – the day of the 50th Annual March for Life.
• While the ACLJ's clients were stopped by National Archives employees and security personnel and told to remove their pro-life apparel or to leave the museum, other visitors in the museum – including those wearing pro-choice apparel – were not stopped by National Archives employees and were allowed to freely tour the museum.
• When faced with the prospect of defending against the ACLJ's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, the government agreed to enter into a consent order and preliminary injunction.
• the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) (the federal agency that manages the National Archives facility) provide a copy of the consent order to all NARA security officers who interact with the public at every NARA facility, including the National Archives.

• The ACLJ is representing 9 students and 3 parents who were unlawfully targeted for their religious pro-life views on January 20, 2023.
• After the event, they went over to explore the nearby Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.
• These were students simply wearing a hat that passively expressed their support for life on the basis of their Christian faith.
• The ACLJ is asking the court to order the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum to ensure that this type of unconstitutional discrimination against pro-life free speech never happens again.