Revised DOD Instruction 1300.17, issued on January 22, 2014, incorporates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). However, it undermines the purpose of RFRA by redefining a well-grounded constitutional term of art, 'substantial burden.' Why did DOD alter this time-tested standard?
Forbes criticized changes to the definition of 'substantial burden' in military regulations.
Share
More from Randy Forbes
I am not really--there may be a lot of excuses for not getting there by 2020 for the Air Force, but I am not listening to excuses on the civilian side anymore.
I believe that we can inject enough doubts into the minds of China's leaders about its use in the scenarios we worry most about.
I believe, if we are to maintain our credibility in the region, if we are to sustain confidence in the rebalance to Asia, that it is extremely important for the Trans-Pacific Partnership to be ratified.
I think reasonable people can have different views on it. My perspective is that the benefits of the Law of the Sea Convention do outweigh any sort of perceived risks.
Other voices in this conversation
