Jewish boys wearing yarmulkes in public schools would be better
protected from government restrictions under legislation approved
by the House of Representatives.
The bill, passed 306-118, has broad support from the Clinton administration,
major religious groups and organizations ranging from the Christian
Coalition to the Anti-Defamation League. But some civil rights groups
also warned of people using new religious protections to justify racial
discrimination.
The legislation aims to override Supreme Court decisions and restore
a principle that laws and regulations may not interfere with the exercise
of religion unless there is a compelling government interest in doing
so.
Supporters cited numerous cases of what they considered bureaucratic
interference with religious practice. Besides city and school dress
and appearance rules, they spoke of local zoning laws that force churches
to close down after certain hours, autopsies on Orthodox Jews in violation
of their religious beliefs, a person denied employment because her
faith prevented her from taking a loyalty oath.
Abba Cohen, director and council for the Washington office of Agudas
Yisroel of America, praised the new law as "an important step
in affirming a value that Americans have so deeply cherished: religious
liberty is a fundamental freedom of the highest order, a right that
government should not interfere with lightly."
"It puts some common sense in the murky waters of the First Amendment
regarding the separation of church and state," said Rep. Jack
Kingston, R-Ga.
The bill, which still requires Senate action, is the latest congressional
move in a decade-long dispute with the courts over how far the government
can go to protect religion.
In 1990 the Supreme Court ruled that religious practices did not have
special rights in the enforcement of laws and regulations. Congress
responded in 1993 by passing a measure stating that governments must
have a compelling reason to bar religious practices, but in 1997
the Supreme Court struck down that law, arguing that Congress had
exceeded its constitutional authority.
The "Religious Liberty Protection Act" attempts to meet constitutional
standards by limiting its scope to federally funded state and local
programs, and issues involving interstate commerce. It also applies
to land use regulations that discriminate against houses of worship. The
Clinton administration, in a statement, said it "strongly supports"
the bill and that the Justice Department, while recognizing the difficult
constitutional questions it posed, believed it would pass constitutional
muster.
In another development a federal appellate court has ruled that students
may be allowed to engage in personal, voluntary prayer in school.
Students were given a green light by the court to pray all they wanted
in school and to lead other students in prayer, as long as school
officials are not involved.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals in Atlanta allows students to pray on the public-address
system and at graduation ceremonies. They cannot actively proselytize
from the auditorium stage, but as long as school personnel do not
have any direct role they can engage in most other forms of religious
expression, by themselves or with other students.
The ruling ends the latest round of a debate that has swept through
the state since the Alabama Legislature explicitly permitted student-led
voluntary prayer in the public schools in 1993.
