Georgia Governor Signs Bill to Strengthen Religious Exercise Protections, but Lawmakers Leave Anti-DEI Bill on the Table

Quick Hits

• Senate Bill 36, known as the Georgia Religious Freedom Restoration Act, aims to protect the free exercise of religion by imposing a “compelling interest” test for government actions that may burden religious practices.
• The bill has significant implications for Georgia schools, including state higher education institutions, as Georgia lawmakers seek to align the state with broader federal policies pushed by the Trump administration.
• Despite being advanced by the Georgia Senate, House Bill 127, which seeks to ban DEI programs at state colleges and universities, ultimately did not pass the House on the final day of the session.

SB 26—Georgia Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Governor Kemp signed Senate Bill (SB) 36, known as the “Georgia Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” a day after lawmakers sent the bill for signature on April 3, 2025. The law will enshrine the “compelling interest” test for determining whether actions of the Georgia state and local governments unconstitutionally burden the free exercise of religion.

The bill is modeled on the former federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) which the Supreme Court of the United States in 1997 struck down as applicable to states.

Georgia’s SB 36 will prohibit the state and local governments from “substantially burden[ing] a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.” Such laws will only be upheld if the government demonstrates: (1) the action furthers “a compelling governmental interest” and (2) is the “least restrictive means of furthering such compelling governmental interest.”

The bill will enable an individual whose religious exercise is burdened to file a claim against the government or use it as a defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

Notably, SB 36 will apply to “any branch, department, agency, instrumentality, and official or other person acting under color of law of this state, or any political subdivision” defined by state law, including local governments and school boards. The law may further apply to actions by state colleges and universities as Georgia courts have recognized the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia to be a state agency or subdivision.

Proponents of the bill argued that it would protect the free exercise of religion from intrusions by federal, state, and local governments. However, opponents have argued that more religious exercise protections are unnecessary as it could lead to discrimination against LGBTQ+ people and religious minorities. More than half of states have RFRA-like protections.

In other states with similar RFRA laws, students and parents have sued colleges and universities due to various rules and regulations that govern student life. In addition, the law provides an additional avenue for employees to sue if they believe that their religious freedom is being infringed upon. Local and state governments, including public colleges and universities, may want to consider conducting a privileged review of existing laws, rules, and policies that may run afoul of the law and also consider narrowly tailoring any new actions that may face scrutiny.

HB 127—DEI Ban

In the final week of the legislative session, the Georgia Legislature advanced but ultimately did not pass House Bill (HB) 127, which would have banned a wide range of DEI programs and initiatives in Georgia’s public schools, colleges, and universities. The legislation follows President Donald Trump’s recent executive orders to eliminate “illegal” DEI programs and initiatives.

The bill would have prohibited all public schools and state colleges and universities from “promot[ing], support[ing], or maintain[ing] any programs or activities that advocate for diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Such prohibited programs under the bill would include efforts to promote:

• “different treatment of, or provide special benefits to, individuals on the basis” of protected classes or characteristics;
• “policies and procedures designed or implemented with reference” to protected classes or characteristics;
• “training, programming, recruitment, retention, or activities” that provide “preferential treatment of any race, color, sex, ethnicity, national origin, gender identity, or sexual orientation over another”; and
• “training, programming, or activities designed or implemented with reference to race, color, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation.”

Specifically, state colleges and universities would be prohibited from taking official positions on any “widely contested opinion referencing” a range of topics or principles around race and gender, including “unconscious or implicit bias,” “cultural appropriation,” “allyship,” “gender ideology or theory,” “microaggressions,” “group marginalization,” “Antiracism,” “systemic oppression,” “social justice,” “intersectionality,” “neopronouns,” “heteronormativity,” “disparate impact,” and racial or sexual privilege.

State schools and colleges that violated the bill could have been stripped of state funding or state-administered federal funding. However, the bill would not have applied to interscholastic and intercollegiate athletics programs or “to the design, designation, or use of a multiple occupancy restroom or changing area.”

Although the bill ultimately failed to pass, higher education institutions, as well as K-12 schools, may want to consider conducting a privileged review of all diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, given that the bill may be revived during a subsequent session. Further, the Trump administration has issued similar guidance to all schools that receive federal funding. Thus, many Georgia schools are already under scrutiny for diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and likely will remain so for the immediate future.

Ogletree Deakins’ Atlanta office will continue to monitor developments and will provide updates on the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Compliance, Employment Law, Georgia, and Higher Education blogs as additional information becomes available.

Follow and Subscribe
LinkedIn | Instagram | Webinars | Podcasts