ADVERTISEMENT

Iowa Governor signs freedom to discriminate bill into law. What will it do?

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
78,452
60,549
113
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds on Tuesday signed into law a measure supporters say will strengthen protections for religious expressions in Iowa.



Opponents contend it would give legal cover to discriminate against LGTBQ Iowans and others.


Reynolds signed Senate File 2095 into law during an event closed to media hosted by the Christian conservative group The Family Leader.




“Thirty years ago, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act passed almost unanimously at the federal level. Since then, religious rights have increasingly come under attack,” Reynolds said in a statement. “Today, Iowa enacts a law to protect these unalienable rights — just as twenty-six other states have done — upholding the ideals that are the very foundation of our country.”


Under the new law, state and local government shall not "substantially burden" someone's exercise of religion unless it is in furtherance of a compelling government interest and must be narrowly tailored in the least restrictive means of pursuing that interest.


A person, corporation, church, foundation or other entity whose exercise of religion has been burdened would have the power to go to court to seek damages, injunctive relief or other legal recourse.


The bill defines exercise of religion as action "substantially motivated by one's sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the exercise is compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief."





Supporters say the bill is needed because, in their view, U.S. Supreme Court rulings have eroded religious freedom protections that were passed into federal law in 1993 by a Democrat-majority Congress and signed by Democratic President Bill Clinton.


The federal law applies only to the federal government, but at least two dozen states have passed state-level versions of the legislation.


House Democrats warned the bill would lead to state-sanctioned discrimination against LGBTQ+ Iowans and denial of reproductive health care, using religious freedom as a defense.


Democrats introduced an amendment defeated by Republicans that would have inserted into the bill protections against discrimination as prescribed in the Iowa Civil Rights Act.


The amendment aimed to restore the original purpose of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) while preventing its misuse to erode civil rights and sidestep non-discrimination laws.


Others said the bill would undermine inclusivity, and harm Iowa's economy, making it harder for Iowa businesses to recruit workers from out of state and retain current residents.


Several business groups and chambers of commerce were registered opposed to the bill, including Krause Group, the Technology Association of Iowa, Principal Financial Group and the Iowa Chamber Alliance.


Rep. Steve Holt, a Republican from Denison and a lead sponsor of the bill, called the arguments against the bill “hyperbolic” and misinformed during floor debate.


Holt said the bill protects religious freedom in a narrow way and requires a balancing test by courts when evaluating restrictions on religious freedom.


Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said the legislation does not mean that a religious claimant is going to win.


“It just means that they’re going to get a hearing and a balancing test,” Thomson said during debate on the bill.


LGBTQ advocacy group One Iowa, in a statement, said the new law would allow broad religious exemptions that open the door for people sidestep anti-discrimination laws.


“There’s no denying it: this bill is aimed at discriminating against LGBTQ+ Iowans, single parents, people needing reproductive healthcare services, and many more,” One Iowa Action Executive Director Courtney Reyes said in a statement.


Reyes said One Iowa “will work tirelessly to amend this law and restore the original intent of the federal RFRA when it was passed: to protect, not to discriminate.”


“Religion should never be weaponized to discriminate against others,” Reyes said. “Unfortunately, in its current form, that’s exactly what both the state and federal RFRAs allow.”
 
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds on Tuesday signed into law a measure supporters say will strengthen protections for religious expressions in Iowa.



Opponents contend it would give legal cover to discriminate against LGTBQ Iowans and others.


Reynolds signed Senate File 2095 into law during an event closed to media hosted by the Christian conservative group The Family Leader.




“Thirty years ago, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act passed almost unanimously at the federal level. Since then, religious rights have increasingly come under attack,” Reynolds said in a statement. “Today, Iowa enacts a law to protect these unalienable rights — just as twenty-six other states have done — upholding the ideals that are the very foundation of our country.”


Under the new law, state and local government shall not "substantially burden" someone's exercise of religion unless it is in furtherance of a compelling government interest and must be narrowly tailored in the least restrictive means of pursuing that interest.


A person, corporation, church, foundation or other entity whose exercise of religion has been burdened would have the power to go to court to seek damages, injunctive relief or other legal recourse.


The bill defines exercise of religion as action "substantially motivated by one's sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the exercise is compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief."





Supporters say the bill is needed because, in their view, U.S. Supreme Court rulings have eroded religious freedom protections that were passed into federal law in 1993 by a Democrat-majority Congress and signed by Democratic President Bill Clinton.


The federal law applies only to the federal government, but at least two dozen states have passed state-level versions of the legislation.


House Democrats warned the bill would lead to state-sanctioned discrimination against LGBTQ+ Iowans and denial of reproductive health care, using religious freedom as a defense.


Democrats introduced an amendment defeated by Republicans that would have inserted into the bill protections against discrimination as prescribed in the Iowa Civil Rights Act.


The amendment aimed to restore the original purpose of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) while preventing its misuse to erode civil rights and sidestep non-discrimination laws.


Others said the bill would undermine inclusivity, and harm Iowa's economy, making it harder for Iowa businesses to recruit workers from out of state and retain current residents.


Several business groups and chambers of commerce were registered opposed to the bill, including Krause Group, the Technology Association of Iowa, Principal Financial Group and the Iowa Chamber Alliance.


Rep. Steve Holt, a Republican from Denison and a lead sponsor of the bill, called the arguments against the bill “hyperbolic” and misinformed during floor debate.


Holt said the bill protects religious freedom in a narrow way and requires a balancing test by courts when evaluating restrictions on religious freedom.


Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said the legislation does not mean that a religious claimant is going to win.


“It just means that they’re going to get a hearing and a balancing test,” Thomson said during debate on the bill.


LGBTQ advocacy group One Iowa, in a statement, said the new law would allow broad religious exemptions that open the door for people sidestep anti-discrimination laws.


“There’s no denying it: this bill is aimed at discriminating against LGBTQ+ Iowans, single parents, people needing reproductive healthcare services, and many more,” One Iowa Action Executive Director Courtney Reyes said in a statement.


Reyes said One Iowa “will work tirelessly to amend this law and restore the original intent of the federal RFRA when it was passed: to protect, not to discriminate.”


“Religion should never be weaponized to discriminate against others,” Reyes said. “Unfortunately, in its current form, that’s exactly what both the state and federal RFRAs allow.”
For those alphabetters feeling threatened by these duly created laws, I believe there is still bus service north to minisooooDUH!!
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT