A 9th Circuit judge has reversed the convictions for 4 volunteers who left water in the desert, finding that humanitarian aid was part of their sincere religious beliefs under RFRA.
documentcloud.org/documents/6763…
/1
documentcloud.org/documents/6763…
/1
The Government argued that because the volunteers were not particularly religious, RFRA was unavailable to them. But the District Court held that moral belief systems infused with religious characteristics can be enough. /2 
Though the volunteers were smart enough to anticipate raising a possible RFRA defense and did associate themselves with the Unitarian Church. /3
The government argued that the volunteers were not being sincere because their beliefs were political, not religious, but the trial court disagreed, finding that they'd undergone substantial hardship to save lives. /4
The judge found that the prosecution placed a substantial burden on the volunteers' religious beliefs even though they were only being subjected to generally applicable laws. After all, RFRA was passed precisely for that reason. /5
And while the Government claimed it can't be a substantial burden not to be able to use the Government's land without a permit, the District Court found that the inability to save lives would have substantially burdened their religious expression. /6
My FAVORITE part. The government says it has a compelling interest in keeping the area "pristine" by protecting it from stray water bottles (corpses are fine tho).
Judge: AYFKM? THIS WAS A BOMBING TEST SITE. /7
Judge: AYFKM? THIS WAS A BOMBING TEST SITE. /7
Finally, this was not the least restrictive means because these people volunteered to regularly clean up any sites where water was left. /8
Because this was a big win for religious liberty and the right to freedom of conscience, we can all look forward to big splash pages on Breitbart and the Federalist, praising the decision. /f
