exclamation

Important notice: To continue serving our valued readers during the postal disruption, complete unrestricted access to the digital edition is available at no extra cost. This will ensure uninterrupted digital access to your copies. Click here to view the digital edition, or learn more.

Rabbi David Saperstein, right, former U.S. religious freedom ambassador, testifies in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 16, 2017. RNS photo/Adelle M. Banks

Constitutionality of leaked executive order on religious freedom called into question

By  Adelle M. Banks, Religion New Service
  • February 17, 2017

WASHINGTON – The former U.S. religious freedom ambassador told a congressional subcommittee that leaked language of a proposed presidential executive order on religious liberty could cause "constitutional problems."

“I think it raises very serious equal protection issues,” said Rabbi David Saperstein, who recently ended his tenure at the U.S. State Department.

According to The Nation, a leaked draft of a proposed executive order titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom” shows that on issues such as same-sex marriage, abortion, gender identity and premarital sex, the Trump administration would allow exemptions for people with religious objections that are so broad it would "legalize discrimination."

The language in that document says, “Americans and their religious organizations will not be coerced by the Federal Government into participating in activities that violate their conscience.”

Answering a question from Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., at a hearing Thursday (Feb. 16), Saperstein said he was concerned the order could give government contractors discretion to refuse services based on their religious beliefs.

“I think it raises significant constitutional problems,” Saperstein told members of a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee.

Nadler, who along with Saperstein has been instrumental in the passage of religious liberty legislation, said laws such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act are designed to shield people from government imposition of religious beliefs.

“However, it should not be used as a sword to enable you to impose your religious belief on someone else,” said the congressman, who raised examples of interracial or same-sex couples being refused at a restaurant by proprietors with religious objections.

Kim Colby, director of the Christian Legal Society’s Center for Law and Religious Freedom, said after the hearing that Nadler’s examples are “misguided” because civil rights laws regarding restaurant discrimination were set more than 50 years ago.

“An executive order can’t change a law that Congress has passed,” said Colby, who also testified before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice. “So a lot of those hypotheticals just can’t happen.”

Please support The Catholic Register

Unlike many media companies, The Catholic Register has never charged readers for access to the news and information on our website. We want to keep our award-winning journalism as widely available as possible. But we need your help.

For more than 125 years, The Register has been a trusted source of faith-based journalism. By making even a small donation you help ensure our future as an important voice in the Catholic Church. If you support the mission of Catholic journalism, please donate today. Thank you.

DONATE