A bill barring the government from substantially burdening an individual's religious liberty passed the House Judiciary Committee today.
House Bill 204 also reinforces a person's right to sue if they feel their religious liberties have been burdened.
State Representative Steve Rawlings, a Republican from Burlington, says House Bill 204 updates the Religious Freedom Act and gives clarity to the courts when it comes to weighing religious rights and the state's interests.
Ultimately, this bill seeks to ensure that religious rights are adequately protected.
HB 204 ensures that Kentucky courts will use the most accommodating language to ensure that religious Kentuckians have a fair day in court.
Codifying these definitions will ensure that Kentuckians can be heard if any part of the government burdens their religious practices.
HB two afford does not create new rights.
Instead, it codifies the judicial standard that determines how seriously we take our commitment to religious freedom in the Commonwealth.
Religious people and houses of worship are facing more and more government intrusion and violations of their right to freely live and freely worship.
We must ensure that our Commonwealth has the strongest Religious Freedom Act before these trends worsen.
So these definitions provide the meaningful direction to judges who need to apply the law to a wide variety of factual scenarios and ensures that citizens have this clarity about their religious freedom rights, which also ensures that they can stand up for their rights instead of possibly being warned by an attorney or someone that Kentucky's RFRA might not apply to them.
Voting against the bill was Representative Katara Herron of Louisville, who questioned why Rawlings added a substitution to the bill that excluded inmates.
There's a part that talks about the protections afforded under this section shall not apply to an inmate in the custody of a jail or local or state correctional or detention facility.
I just want to get more clarity on why that is in there and needed.
And then also, is that the only change in this committee?
So it is the only change.
We had a request from a Kenton County prosecutor that didn't want to have civil actions filed against him or law enforcement or judges from inmates.
So that was his request and that is the purpose of the committee substitute.
So that is the one exception is inmates.
CHAFFIN With the Alliance Defending Freedom added that there is a federal law already in place that protects the religious rights of inmates.