There has always been some tension between the
Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise protections of the First Amendment, but the Supreme Court, when considering a
similar challenge to the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act in 2005 — wherein the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that granting protections to religious prisoners amounted to a violation of the
Establishment Clause — ruled that alleviating a state - imposed substantial burden on religious practice did not violate the
Establishment Clause.
«A restaurant or
similar retail food
establishment shall not be liable in any civil action in Federal or State court (other than an action brought by the United States or a State) for any claims arising out of an alleged violation of this
clause or any State law permitted under section 403A (a)(4).»