Published September 15, 2025
On September 15, 2025, EPPC filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit case Lopez v. United States, urging the Court to “recogniz[e] the obvious” — that destroying an Apache holy site should be considered a substantial burden on the Apaches’ sincere religious exercise under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
The amicus brief, filed on behalf of EPPC and Religious Freedom Institute (RFI) and drafted by EPPC scholars Eric Kniffin and Rachel N. Morrison and RFI Senior Legal Fellow Ian Speir, explained that the Ninth Circuit got its RFRA analysis wrong. It also warned “the Ninth Circuit’s novel conception of the substantial burden analysis—walling off from RFRA’s scrutiny whatever vaguely qualifies as the government’s “internal affairs” … will have pernicious effects far beyond this case.”
Finally, the brief encouraged the Court to use the Lopez case to correct the errors in its previous rulings and align the Ninth Circuit’s substantial burden analysis with its sister circuits and the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor.
Eric Kniffin is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he works on a range of initiatives to protect and strengthen religious liberty as part of EPPC’s Administrative State Accountability Project.
