MBE Rules · Constitutional Law
RFRA and RLUIPA
RFRA / RLUIPA
The rule
By statute, federal action (RFRA) and state land-use or prisoner regulation (RLUIPA) substantially burdening religion must satisfy strict scrutiny — restoring pre-Smith protection as a statutory matter.
In plain English
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) require that any federal or state action that significantly burdens a person's religious exercise must meet strict scrutiny. This means the government must show that the action serves a compelling interest and is the least restrictive means of achieving that interest.
Worked example
A state law prohibits the use of certain natural substances for religious ceremonies. A local church claims this law substantially burdens their religious practice. Under RFRA, the court finds that the state must demonstrate a compelling interest and that the law is the least restrictive means to achieve that interest. The law is struck down as unconstitutional.
Memory hook
Strict scrutiny for religious burdens: compelling interest or bust!
The trap
Exams may include scenarios where students overlook the necessity of strict scrutiny, mistakenly applying a lower standard of review. Be cautious of facts that suggest a compelling interest but do not satisfy the least restrictive means requirement.
How examiners test it
Questions often present a conflict between government regulations and religious practices, requiring candidates to identify the applicable standard of review and analyze whether the government's actions meet that standard.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.