They suggested three ways in which RFRA might conceivably be interpreted (misinterpreted, really) to create bad consequences: (1) to give a church's opponents
legal «standing» (a technical term meaning the right to sue) to challenge the church's tax - exempt status; (2) to allow
taxpayers to claim their
free exercise rights would be violated if a religiously affiliated organization receives government
assistance under a secular program; and, most importantly, (3) to allow pro-abortion plaintiffs to claim a
free exercise right to abortion if Roe v. Wade is overruled and states enact anti-abortion laws.