> The U.S. Supreme Court had struck down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
> just two weeks ago. That act, passed in 1993, said a government decision
> that substantially interfered with a person's exercise of religion had to
> be justified by some state interest or was void, Kreiger explained. "It
> raised some interesting issues," he said, but with the act struck down so
> was the Ponkapoag's case.
This is not an accurate statement of the effect of the RFRA decision in
Massachusetts. MA law provides its own basis for protecting religious
freedom, independent of and stronger than US law. See:
http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/nativeweb/subject/trapp/memo_rights.html
The Ponkapoag was undoubtedly derailed on grounds other than the demise of
RFRA.
Peter
-- -- -- --
Peter d'Errico derrico@legal.umass.edu
Legal Studies Faculty voice: 413-545-2003
University of Massachusetts: Amherst, MA, USA 01003 fax: 413-545-1640
http://www.umass.edu/legal/derrico/