This bill limits the application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) when federal anti-discrimination, labor, funding, and equal access laws are being enforced, and clarifies that RFRA can only be used to challenge government actions in litigation.
Cory Booker
Senator
NJ
The Do No Harm Act amends the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to ensure that federal anti-discrimination, labor, and equal access laws take precedence over religious freedom claims in specific circumstances. This legislation clarifies that RFRA protections cannot be used to override requirements in federal contracts or agreements involving government funding. Furthermore, the Act explicitly limits the application of RFRA to challenges against government actions, precluding its use in private litigation between non-governmental parties.
Do No Harm Act Limits Religious Freedom Claims When They Conflict with Civil Rights and Labor Laws
The "Do No Harm Act" is designed to draw a clearer line in the sand regarding when religious freedom claims can override federal laws meant to protect people from discrimination or ensure fair working conditions. Essentially, this bill modifies the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA)—the law that requires the government to meet a high bar (the "compelling interest" test) before burdening someone's religious practice.
When Civil Rights Take the Wheel
Section 2 of this bill makes a major change: it carves out specific exceptions where RFRA’s protections simply don’t apply. If the government is enforcing a federal law that prevents harm or ensures fairness, RFRA steps back. This is huge for the enforcement of key anti-discrimination statutes like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). For example, if a business claims a religious exemption to avoid hiring someone based on a protected characteristic, this bill ensures that the government can enforce the Civil Rights Act without having to navigate RFRA’s high legal hurdle. The same waiver applies to enforcing labor standards, like minimum wage laws, or laws protecting children from abuse or exploitation. For the average employee, this means federal workplace protections are less likely to be defeated by a religious claim.
No RFRA Loophole for Government Cash or Services
This Act also tightens up how RFRA interacts with government funding and services. First, if you accept federal money—through a contract, grant, or agreement—you can’t use RFRA to get out of the specific requirements of that funding. Say a non-profit receives a federal grant to run a homeless shelter that must serve all people equally; this bill ensures they can’t use RFRA to deny services to a specific group based on religious objections. Second, RFRA can’t be used to prevent someone from getting equal access to any good, service, or benefit the government provides. This means if you are accessing a public service, the government can’t use a religious claim to create an unequal experience for you.
Keeping Private Disputes Private
Section 3 addresses a procedural issue by clarifying who can actually use RFRA in court. The bill makes it crystal clear that RFRA is a shield against government action only. You can only bring a lawsuit under RFRA if you are challenging a law or action taken by a government entity. This change prevents RFRA from being used in lawsuits between private parties—say, a landlord suing a tenant, or one company suing another. This procedural cleanup means that your neighbor can’t suddenly pull out a RFRA defense in a private property dispute, ensuring the law stays focused on its original purpose: balancing religious freedom against government overreach.