Indiana: Let the Backpedaling Begin!

Looks like the heat was a bit much for Indiana Gov. Mike Pence:

Gov. Mike Pence, scorched by a fast-spreading political firestorm, told The Star on Saturday that he will support the introduction of legislation to “clarify” that Indiana’s controversial Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not promote discrimination against gays and lesbians.

“I support religious liberty, and I support this law,” Pence said in an exclusive interview. “But we are in discussions with legislative leaders this weekend to see if there’s a way to clarify the intent of the law.”

Governor, the intent of the law is quite clear, and has been from its introduction.

Sen. Schneider was the sponsor of the bill.

And of course, it was all a misunderstanding:

Amid the deepest crisis of his political career, Pence said repeatedly that the intense blowback against the new law is the result of a “misunderstanding driven by misinformation.”

And here I thought it was taken out of context.

But everyone else is doing it!

In defense of the legislation, he noted that 19 other states and the federal government have adopted RFRA laws similar to Indiana’s. And he pointed out that President Barack Obama voted for Illinois’ version of RFRA as a state senator.

Actually, I'm hard put to figure out why Indiana's bill is getting such blowback, except that it is very broad. It may just be that this one marks the tipping point. I bet Pence and the Republicans in the legislature thought they were going to sneak this one through, just like everyone else has.

And drawing comparisons with Illinois' RFRA doesn't cut it:

But the Republican governor and possible presidential contender left out an important fact. While Illinois does have a law that gives special protections to religious objectors, it also bans discrimination based on sexual orientation. Indiana, on the other hand, has no such ban.

That distinction is crucial, legal experts say, because anti-discrimination laws are considered stronger than religious exemptions.

According to Pence, a similar ban is "not on his agenda."

It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out: the "clarification" is going to be happening under a microscope. And there's also no guarantee that this and similar laws are going to hold up in the courts:

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Brent Steele, a group of 16 legal scholars from across the country — including law professors from Indiana and Notre Dame universities — write that "it is not at all clear that the proposed Indiana RFRA would lead courts to recognize such an exemption."

In fact, only one such case has arisen in states that already have a religious freedom law. In that case, a Christian wedding photographer was sued after refusing to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony in New Mexico. Although that state has a religious freedom law, the photographer lost.

"Courts generally believe that anti-discrimination laws serve compelling governmental interests, and nothing in the proposed legislation would change that," they wrote.

On the other hand, I can't quite shake the idea that these laws are as much a delaying tactic as anything else: like the sodomy laws that are still on the books in a number of states, the RFRAs will serve as a means to intimidate and harass gays and lesbians.