LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – A recently released report from the Napa Legal Institute ranks how well states are protecting freedoms for faith-based groups. The report, the first annual “Faith and Freedom Index” is described by the group as an analysis that scores state laws that affect faith-based federally tax-exempt nonprofits with scores based on consistent benchmarks including the state’s “friendliness” to religious freedom and regulatory freedom for nonprofits.

MORE NEWS: Middle East Expert: Americans ‘Lulled’ Into False Sense of Security on Terrorism

The group awarded scores in 14 categories based on religious and regulatory freedom. The factors analyzed include the protection of the free exercise of religion, existence of a state Blane Amendment, employer freedoms, charitable registration laws, and auditing requirements as well as nine other criteria.

Sadly, no state received a positive ranking of 80% or higher in both categories and 32 states received scores of 40% or lower. For those wanting to move to states with a little more religious freedoms than others, Texas and Alabama were the highest scorers on the list.

Napa Legal Executive Director Mary Margaret Beecher explains about the report, “The work of faith-based nonprofits matters, which means that states’ friendliness to these nonprofits also matters. Faith-based nonprofits face threats to their religious freedom and the often-crushing weight of regulatory burdens. If we value faith-based organizations’ contributions to building and sustaining our communities, our state laws should encourage, not hinder, these organizations. In the Faith and Freedom Index, we explain what needs to change and how.”

Michigan ended up with an overall score of 29%, dead last at #51 of 51 jurisdictions for its friendliness towards faith-based non profit organizations, making it one of the worst states in which to operate a faith-based nonprofit.

The report says that “Michigan has some policies that facilitate the constitutions of faith-based nonprofits, including an automatic exemption from state corporate income tax for religious organizations that have 501(c)(3) status. Michigan, however has several polices that are burdensome to faith-based nonprofits operating in the state, such as a broad Blaine Amendment, no RFRA, and laws regarding public accommodations and employment that include no meaningful exemptions for religious organizations.”

Michigan’s Blaine Amendment, enacted in 1970, prohibits the use of public funding to support families who want to choose private educational opportunities. RFRA is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The RFRA exists on a federal level but the state of Michigan does not have its own version. The Supreme Court had said in a court ruling that states would need to pass their own version of the RFRA if they wanted to protect their citizens from overzealous governmental laws or actions.

MORE NEWS: ‘Very Strange’ UM Lab Case Ends With Guilty Plea and Immediate Deportation

The Faith and Freedom Index scored Michigan with a 22% for religious freedom which put the state third from the bottom with only Nevada and Maryland being worse. One of the things cited in the index was the fact that Michigan law has no explicit constitutional or statutory protections for religious exercise during a time of emergency. That is something that Michiganders saw happening in real time during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Michigan ranks a little better in regulatory freedom but not much. They got a score of 39% which still puts them last in the country. The score was based on factors including the fact that Michigan imposes sales and use taxes on religious organizations’ sales and only provides limited exemptions for certain items; Michigan imposes property tax and provides only fragmented property tax exemptions that include only a narrow subset of religious organizations; and Michigan law permitting a director, in the fulfillment of the director’s fiduciary duties, to rely on the opinion of individuals who can reasonably be assumed to have expertise on a certain matter, but does not expressly allow a director to rely on guidance from religious figures within his or her faith tradition.