This Article analyzes the clash between historic preservation and religious freedom in the context of the United States Supreme Court's decision in City of Boerne v. Flores. (117 S. Ct. 2157 (1997). In Flores, the Court ruled on the constitutionality of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), an act which affords additional protection to religious practices by subjecting neutral, non-religion based government laws such as preservation ordinances to judicial scrutiny. Using the backdrop of the Flores decision, the Article analyzes the constitutionality and policy behind RFRA and examines RFRA's effect on preservation. The Article includes a history of both the preservation movement and the Court's treatment of religious freedom, as well as alternatives which could afford greater balance between religious freedom interests and historic preservation.
Williamson, Elizabeth C.
"City of Boerne v. Flores and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act: The Delicate Balance Between Religious Freedom and Historic Preservation,"
Florida State University Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law: Vol. 13
, Article 3.
Available at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/jluel/vol13/iss1/3