Three Decades On: RFRA's Modern Pressure Points

In-person registration is now closed

Livestream is available for virtual attendees.

Join us on Wednesday, January 31, at 12:00 PM ET

for a special lunch program sponsored by our Religious Liberties Practice Group.

Lunch will be served at 12:00 pm with a discussion on RFRA to follow. 

The Mayflower Hotel

District Room

1127 Connecticut Avenue NW

(Farragut North Metro)

Washington, D.C. 

The cost is $20.00 for members and $25.00 for non-members. This event is free for student members.

We will not be accepting walk-ins or on-site registration for this event.

In-person registration closed on January 29 at 12pm ET.

***

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) turned 30 last year. The law, which passed with bipartisan support, came in response to the 1990 case Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith and has since served as the basis for many challenges to government actions that potentially burden religious liberty. Since its passing, RFRA has been the topic of much conversation including how it should be applied, how protections for religious liberty should be balanced with other potential protections, and whether there should be attempts to revise it. Despite three decades of experiences, those conversations remain as lively today as in years past. Join us for a discussion of RFRA's impact and the modern pressure points it faces.

Speakers Announced to Date:

• Hon. Paul D. Clement, Partner, Clement & Murphy, PLLC
• Prof. William A. Galston, Senior Fellow, Governance Studies, The Brookings Institution
• Ms. Rachel Laser, President and CEO, Americans United for Separation of Church and State
• Prof. Mark L. Rienzi, President, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty; Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Center for Religious Liberty, Catholic University
• (Moderator) Ms. Jennie Bradley Lichter, Deputy General Counsel, The Catholic University of America

*******

As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.