[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 17, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Page S1586]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Equality Act

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, today the Senate Judiciary Committee is 
considering a grave threat to the right of conscience. The House 
recently passed the Equality Act, which would demolish religious 
liberty protections, ironically making Americans of certain beliefs 
decidedly unequal under the law. In other words, for something called 
religious protections, the Equality Act would diminish the capability 
to be considered equal under the law.
  It is not an accident of careless drafting that permits this outcome. 
The language is both so expansive and so explicit that it must be 
intentional and it must be intentionally hostile to people who hold 
such beliefs.
  The language expands the definition of public accommodations to 
include prohibiting discrimination by ``any establishment that provides 
a good, service, or program, including a . . . food bank, service or 
care center, [or] shelter,'' and any organization receiving Federal 
funding. Religiously affiliated entities seeking to put their beliefs 
into action outside their church, mosque, or synagogue must comply.
  The authors know such an expansive definition infringes on the 
constitutional rights of religious liberty. That is because this 
legislation would explicitly--explicitly--deny recourse to the 
Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA, a bill that was passed with 
overwhelmingly bipartisan majorities in both Chambers of Congress 
before being signed by President Bill Clinton in 1993.
  This denial cuts off two legal paths for people of conscience. One, 
an individual or institution cannot sue the Federal Government to 
prevent enforcement of this act without statutory--explicit statutory--
authority of RFRA. And, two, the individual institution that is sued 
for discrimination under this bill cannot rely on RFRA as a defense
  It is not an exaggeration to say that the five lines related to RFRA 
in this bill represent one of the most dramatic assaults against 
religious faith and conscience that I have seen in my time in Congress. 
The effects will be damaging to communities in Kansas and across the 
country.
  If passed, people of faith must decide whether to adhere to their 
deeply held beliefs or to the law. This law effectively says it is 
better to have fewer doctors in rural Kansas, which desperately needs 
them, than it is to have doctors of moral conviction; that it is better 
to shutter social services administered by faith-based groups that fill 
gaps in our safety net than to allow them to remain true to their 
mission; or that it is better to force the closure of religious schools 
in urban areas, which so often provide a path out of poverty, than to 
allow them to remain open and teach principles of faith.
  In response to the Obama contraception mandate a decade ago, I 
warned: ``If the government can compel an individual or group to 
violate one's conscience, then there is no limit to government power.'' 
That remains true now, nearly 10 years later, and remains true into the 
future.
  I will oppose the use of such government power to infringe on matters 
of religious belief and conscience, and I stand in opposition to the 
Equality Act.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.