In a surprising vote on the floor Wednesday evening, House Bill 4012 died on a 7 to 27 vote.
The bill, known as the Religious Freedom Protection Act, would have established a process for courts to follow when people or businesses claimed that government action was infringing upon their religious beliefs.
Upon its introduction in the House in January, the bill was known as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
No member of the body stood to speak to the bill before Wednesday’s vote. After explaining the bill, Senate Judiciary Chair Charles Trump only told members to “follow their hearts and consciences.”
The bill had seen several changes since it was approved in the House of Delegates last month. The largest of those were the added provisions that ensure the bill will not be used for discrimination.
An amendment was also added to the bill that protects the state from lawsuits stemming from child vaccination laws.
Several Senators said they had received backlash for speaking against the House version of the bill while it was on Second Reading Tuesday.
Senate President Bill Cole voted against the bill.
After a late-night meeting Friday, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee emerged with a new version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Religious Freedom Protection Act- still House Bill 4012- received another major change on the Senate floor Tuesday.
As amended by the committee, the bill included the following changes:
A more narrow definition of “substantially burdened”
An award of injunctive relief and no allowance for an award of attorneys fees and court costs for a plaintiff
Added language to protect churches and clerics who refuse to perform a service or ceremony or refuse to recognize a marriage that is contrary to their faith
Added language to make it more clear that the bill cannot be used as a tool to discriminate
Republican Sen. Ed Gaunch attempted to remove those provisions on the floor Tuesday, restoring the bill to the House-approved version. His amendment, however, failed. Democratic Sen. Corey Palumbo tried for a second time to add protection to the bill for municipalities that have passed their own non-discrimination ordinances. His amendment failed when proposed to members of the Senate’s Judiciary Committee, but Tuesday, Palumbo added a provision to the bill that said vaccine laws could also not be challenged under the law.
“This will make clear it cannot be used as a sword to invalidate those ordinances, but once again, if you’re inclined to want to discriminate in West Virginia, you can still use Article 3 Section 15 of our Constitution to do your discriminating,” Palumbo said. “You just can’t use this bill.”
Article 3 Section 15 guarantees religious freedom in the state. It was Senate Majority Leader Mitch Carmichael’s emotional speech in favor of the amendment, however, that grabbed the attention of the chamber.
“This issue’s not easy. I prayed for clarity, wisdom and discernment on this,” Carmicahel said.
“I just think this sends the wrong message. I think we need to value the human dignity and the goodness in people and I don’t want us to go down this path. I just don’t.”
Palumbo’s amendment was accepted 23-11. The amended version of the bill will be up for a vote Wednesday.
This story was updated March 2, 7:40 pm: House Bill 4012 died on a 7 to 27 vote by the West Virginia Senate. The bill, known as the Religious Freedom Protection Act, would have established a process for courts to follow when people or businesses claimed that government action was infringing upon their religious beliefs.
17-year old Davis Kimble, a young activist who had spoken out against the bill earlier this week, had this response to the Senate’s decision:“I think this serves as a victory for not only minorities across the state, but also for passionate community leaders who stood up and made their voices heard. It’s a shame we had to fight this fight, but it shows a willingness on the part of our state legislatures to hear the people’s voices and do what’s best for the state and its wonderful people.”
Original Post: The bill was renamed the West Virginia Religious Freedom Protection Act by the chamber’s Finance Committee on Friday night. For the past few weeks, several small businesses and even mayors have spoken out against the bill, but now, the academic community is joining the opposition. Three major West Virginia colleges and universities – and some high school students – have stood up to publicly announce that they are also against the bill.
House Bill 4012 establishes a legal standard for judges to follow when a person feels the government has infringed on their religious freedoms.
Opponents say the bill would encourage more discrimination against gays, lesbians, Muslims, and other groups in the state.
The Senate Finance Committee approved language that expressly says the intent of the law is not to allow for discrimination, but did not approve a separate amendment to protect non-discrimination ordinances passed by several cities across the state.
“When laws like this pass, it moves our society backwards in terms of social justice,” said Dr. Molly Clever, an assistant professor of sociology and social justice at West Virginia Wesleyan College. She and the rest of the Wesleyan Faculty Senate – a governing body made up of university staff – passed a resolution last Thursday saying they felt that HB 4012 violates the college’s principles of social justice and human dignity.
Credit Courtesy Davis Kimble
/
An LGBT advocacy group at Morgantown High School, called Spectrum, marches in their school’s Homecoming parade
“The 1964 Civil Rights Act directly addressed this issue. It said you don’t get to deny who sits at the lunch counter. When you are a business open to the public, when you serve the public, you have a responsibility to serve everyone,” Clever said.
Wesleyan’s Faculty Senate passed the resolution after similar resolutions were passed at Marshall University and West Virginia University.
Clever says a number of her students approached her recently, saying they were concerned about HB 4012. A club at Morgantown high School, called Spectrum, is also speaking out against the bill. The club’s president, 17-year-old Davis Kimble, is straight. But his parents are lesbians, and his sister is a transgender female. He believes the bill will allow more discrimination of LGBT people, like his family.
“Members of the community are going to struggle, and those members do exist. They might not be as outspoken, but they exist. I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that anyone would argue that this bill’s not being used to discriminate,” said Kimble, whose mom, Kelly Kimble, is the chair of the LGBT civil rights advocacy organization Fairness West Virginia, which is fiercely opposed to HB 4012.
But Davis Kimble says he’s advocating against this legislation not just because of his family, but also because he thinks laws like these are pushing young people like him to leave West Virginia.
“The entire younger generation wants to leave. I want to leave. I am leaving, and that’s not good for business, that’s not good for the state,” he said.
Although Kimble says he’s not staying in West Virginia, he wants to help fight for his friends and his family who are still in the state.
The Senate’s Judiciary Committee chairman disagrees with Kimble and his family, saying the new language in the bill does address their concerns of possible discrimination. The full Senate will consider further amendments to the bill Tuesday, March 1, and put the bill to a final vote Wednesday.
More than two weeks after it was approved by the House of Delegates, senators are beginning to move on a bill that would codify a judicial standard for cases where plaintiffs argue the government has infringed on their religious freedoms.
On first reading in the Senate on Monday, House Bill 4012 has seen some changes since it was approved in the House Feb. 11.
House Bill 4012 is no longer titled the West Virginia Religious Freedom Restoration Act, but instead has been changed to the West Virginia Religious Freedom Protection Act.
“It’s not restoration act here in West Virginia because we have nothing to restore,” Senate Judiciary Chair Charles Trump said of his committee’s version of the bill.
“The strict scrutiny and compelling state interest test that is in RFRAs that have been enacted in other states and the federal level did not have to be restored in West Virginia [because] that was our law under the Constitution and the cases that have been decided [here].”
Trump said the bill does maintain it’s sole purpose, “to codify the test under which courts are required to evaluate case[s]” where someone claims their religious freedoms are being “substantially burdened” by government action, but the committee has included what Trump calls “necessary changes.”
Other changes the committee approved Friday include:
A more narrow definition of “substantially burdened”
An award of injunctive relief and no allowance for an award of attorneys fees and court costs for a plaintiff
Added language to protect churches and clerics who refuse to perform a service or ceremony or refuse to recognize a marriage that is contrary to their faith
Added language to make it more clear that the bill cannot be used as a tool to discriminate
“I endeavored to make it clear as we possible could that we are not saying religious rights trump everything else. We’re not saying other rights are exempt from any trumping by religious rights or religious freedoms,” Trump said. “We are trying to give the courts the mechanism by which they determine a balance on a case by case basis.” Those opposed to the bill still believe the language is not enough to prevent discrimination should the bill become law, but some senators have expressed support for the House version and dissatisfaction with the committee amendments.
