UC Riverside

The 7-2 decision of SCOTUS on 8 July 2020, favoring “The Little Sisters v. Pennsylvania” should remind us of the highly charged nature of so-called “religious liberty,” or “free exercise.” Central to the case was the issue of religious exemption from generally applicable laws. By an overwhelming majority, SCOTUS ruled that the Little Sisters were exempt from this provision of the ACA. I shall argue how one might frame a novel counter-argument against, at least, one class of religious exemptions. As one knows, the legal and political status of religious exemptions is amplified by religious passions, stirred through a long history of competing court decisions and legislation. For that reason alone, a full and proper treatment of religious exemption calls for a major investment of specialized intellectual effort. But I shall only be arguing that those outside the specialized legal discourse community may notice oddities escaping the attention of insiders. In such a spirit of an inquisitive outsider, I should offer these reflections.