The Application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to Appearance Regulations that Presumptively Prohibit Observant Sikh Lawyers from Joining the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General Corps

摘要

Observant Sikh lawyers are presumptively prohibited from joining the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps because they cannot satisfy the Armyu27s appearance regulations. This essay argues that this presumptive prohibition violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Under RFRA, the federal government may substantially burden an individualu27s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that its application of the burden furthers a compelling governmental interest by the least restrictive means.u27 The Armyu27s appearance regulations are designed to promote two interests-uniformity and safety. In the course of furthering these interests, the Armyu27s appearance regulations effectively preclude observant Sikhs from joining the U.S. Army JAG Corps. The Sikh religion requires its male followers to wear turbans and forbids all of its followers from cutting their hair. Both requirements purportedly interfere with the Armyu27s asserted interests in uniformity and safety. This purported interference forms the basis for a conclusion that observant Sikhs are appropriately excluded from joining the U.S. Army JAG Corps. This essay argues against the necessity of such a conclusion by demonstrating that under RFRA (1) the Army does not have a compelling interest in disallowing exceptions to its appearance regulations, and (2) the Armyu27s appearance regulations do not constitute the least restrictive means of promoting safety. Because the Armyu27s appearance regulations violate RFRA, they must be amended to allow for the accommodation of observant Sikhs in the U.S. Army JAG Corps.