Last week, in ” title=”here” target=”_blank”>here; the court’s opinion ” title=”First Amendment prohibits” target=”_blank”>First Amendment prohibits courts from doing. As ” title=”court said” target=”_blank”>court said:
New York, through the Kosher Act, has not explicitly adopted or endorsed one religion or religious group over another, nor has it encouraged particular religious activities. The neutral labeling requirement does not define “kosher” or any other religious terms and contrasts with prior situations in which this Court has found a perception of endorsement. …
Therefore, because the amended Kosher Act neither advances nor impedes religion, has a secular purpose, and does not create an excessive entanglement between state and religion, it does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
The court also found a Free Exercise challenge in want because Kosher Act is a neutral, generally applicable law that imposes a nonsubstantial burden and has a rationale basis. In other words, none of the key elements for a Free Exercise violation cut against the kosher law.
