A group challenges a forest service permit to build a ski facility on sacred sites, claiming a First Amendment right to free exercise. What must the group show to prevail?

• A. The permit is aimed at suppressing the religious practices of the group
• B. The permit was neutrally applied and generally applicable
• C. The action is content-based and triggers strict scrutiny regardless of target
• D. The government action affects all religious practices equally

Answer: (A)

The key idea is how the Free Exercise Clause treats government actions that burden religious practice. To prevail, the group must show that the permit action targets their religion rather than applying equally and neutrally to everyone. When the government act is aimed specifically at suppressing religious practices, it triggers stricter scrutiny and is more likely to be invalid, because it shows hostility toward religion. Here, showing that the permit is aimed at suppressing the group’s religious practices would establish that targeting, making it the strongest path to victory.

If the permit were neutrally applied and generally applicable, the burden on the group’s religious exercise would be less vulnerable to challenge (especially after Smith, which allows neutral, generally applicable laws to stand). The other options describe situations that don’t fit a target-on-religion or anti-religion action, or mix in First Amendment concepts (like content-based scrutiny) that aren’t the focus here.