The fact is, the Indiana bill was never about defending a Sikh who wanted to wear a turban with his police uniform or protecting Amish-owned shops from burdensome red tape. If real religious liberty violations had been occurring in Indiana, they would have been addressed a long time ago. That didn’t happen. In Indiana, it became imperative to pass a “religious freedom” law only after same-sex marriage became legal there in October of 2014.
This can just as well apply to Georgia’s RFRA as well. And our own potential landmark marriage case, Inniss v. Aderhold, hasn’t yet been decided in the 11th Circuit.