LRRP Director Liz Reiner Platt examines what the Supreme Court's decision in Landor v. Louisiana, denying a Rastafarian man any remedy for an undisputed religious rights violation, reveals about who religious freedom actually protects.

LRRP filed an amicus brief in an Indiana Supreme Court case considering whether to uphold a lower court ruling that created religious exemptions from the state’s near-total abortion ban.

In January of 2025, President Donald Trump withdrew a policy known as the “sensitive locations memo,” which had previously limited immigration enforcement in locations such as houses of worship and religious ceremonies. Religious groups challenged the withdrawal of these protections as, among other things, a violation of the groups’ religious liberty rights. This document provides updates on initial decisions in these lawsuits.

“People abducted from church parking lots… religious groups terrified to run their soup kitchens… This is the country we live in, the America that President Donald Trump has consistently claimed he would transform into a beacon for religious liberty.”

–LRRP Director Liz Platt

This report is intended as a practical tool for immigration attorneys, criminal defense lawyers, civil rights advocates, faith-based organizations, and houses of worship.

Thumbnail image courtesy of Max Herman.

Catholic hospitals have long prohibited abortion within their facilities. However, in the years after Roe, they were able to say “not here” while quietly relying on secular hospitals to offer the services needed to keep their patients safe. LRRP Director Elizabeth Reiner Platt has co-authored a paper in the Maryland Journal of Health Care Law and Policy that details this new relationship between hospital and state-level abortion bans.

This FAQ explains whether and how RFRA might apply to protect people and communities of faith from immigration-related surveillance and enforcement.

“As progressive faith communities garner more public attention—and legal wins—my hope is that they lead us on a path toward a more pluralistic and balanced approach to religious liberty.”

– LRRP Director Liz Reiner Platt, Gender Policy Report.

This free, virtual curriculum explores the history of religious liberty in the U.S. and contemporary issues in religion law, focusing on how religious freedom has protected—or failed to protect—Black Americans.

"As abortion rights defenders in Iowa and elsewhere navigate an increasingly restrictive legislative environment, RFRA challenges are only likely to increase—and they have the critical benefit of elevating the abortion stories of religious people."

–LRRP's Dr. Christine Ryan

This report distills the factors courts consider, and do not consider, when assessing whether beliefs and practices are religious.

LRRP's amicus brief in Individual Members of the Medical Licensing Board of Indiana v. Anonymous Plaintiff 1 argues that Indiana's RFRA codifies a right to a religiously motivated abortion, drawing on research from religious studies scholars and the first-hand accounts of abortion patients across Christian, Jewish, and Muslim traditions.

This article responds to critiques of lawsuits seeking a religious liberty right to access abortion, arguing that granting expansive religious liberty claims made by religious conservatives is both constitutionally problematic and normatively unfair.

LRRP’s Dr. Christine Ryan details how the conservative win in the 2014 Hobby Lobby decision was used to protect pro-abortion religious beliefs in Indiana.

This legal explainer tackles the three main myths surrounding the legal questions in lawsuits arguing for a religious right to abortion.

This resource was originally created to accompany a post-screening talk on Under G-d, a documentary short film about the national Jewish response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

Can a fast food chain refuse to serve LGBTQ customers? Can a photographer refuse to take pictures at a Jewish wedding? Haven’t businesses always been able to turn away certain customers or refuse to provide goods and services they oppose? This Q&A addresses these questions and others, explaining the latest legal developments at the intersection of anti-discrimination law and the First Amendment.

LRRP Director Liz Reiner Platt explains why religious liberty protects the right to refuse participation in a ritual as much as the right to engage in one.

LRRP and partners filed an amicus brief arguing that Free Exercise Rights would be burdened by Indiana's Fetal Tissue Disposition Law.