•  
  •  
 

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

Authors

Erik Renner

Abstract

This paper focuses on the Ninth Circuit’s understanding of the “substantial burden” standard under RFRA as it is applied to Native American sacred site cases. This paper looks at the old Ninth Circuit’s standard as set out in Navajo Nation, and its new standard as set out in Apache Stronghold. By understanding how the courts, specifically the Ninth Circuit, have limited their definition of the “substantial burden” under RFRA in sacred site cases, this paper will argue that the standard should be expanded to include “preventing religious exercise.” This expansion of what is a “substantial burden” under RFRA will better align with how Native Americans practice their religions and will be more faithful to the broad reach that Congress intended RFRA to have.

Share

COinS