Federal · Title 42 — Public Health and Welfare

42 U.S.C. § 2000bb: Congressional findings and declaration of purposes

Read the full statutory text
the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution; laws “neutral” toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise; governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification; in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests. 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 free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government.

Verify at the official source: Federal legislative text

Facing this? Know exactly what happens next.

MOFRD turns this code section into your situation: the deadlines that apply to you, the forms your county uses, and the resolution paths people in your position actually take. Free for 3 days — no card required.

This page is legal information, not legal advice. Code text is sourced from official publications and may lag amendments — always confirm at the official source linked above. Plain-English summaries and relationship data are AI-derived and reviewed on an ongoing basis; verify with a licensed attorney before acting.