Members of a religious group seek to hold an overnight encampment and a midnight dance on top of a mountain inside a U.S. National Park. The park prohibits overnight camping and campfires in that location. The park denied the permit. The regulation is neutral on its face and in application and serves an important public interest. Is the denial valid?

• A. The permit denial is invalid because it targets religious practice.
• B. The permit denial is invalid because it discriminates against a religious group.
• C. The permit denial is invalid because a more permissive approach is needed.
• D. The permit denial is valid because the regulation is neutral and serves an important public interest.

Answer: (D)

The main idea is that a government rule that is neutral in meaning and equally applied, and that serves a legitimate public purpose, can regulate religious exercise without violating the Free Exercise Clause. Here, the national park’s ban on overnight camping and campfires in that location is neutral on its face (it doesn’t target religion) and applies to all visitors, not just a religious group. It also serves important public interests like safety and protecting resources. Because the regulation is neutral and generally applicable and pursues a legitimate objective, denying the permit is valid.

If a rule targeted religious practice or singled out a religious group, or if it wasn’t applied generally (making an exception for some activities or groups), it could run afoul of the Free Exercise Clause. The idea that more permissive accommodation is needed doesn’t apply here given the broad, neutral, generally applicable nature of the regulation and its important public-interest aim.