In United States v. Winddancer, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41574 (MD Tenn., June 19, 2006), a Tennessee federal district court rejected claims of Ed Winddancer that his free exercise rights, as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), are infringed by enforcing against him the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). Winddancer, who did not belong to federally recognized tribe, had been indicted for violating restrictions on possessing and bartering eagle and certain other bird feathers. As to the MBTA Winddancer only had standing to mount a “facial” challenge, since he could have applied for a permit and did not. The court held that he had not even alleged that there were not constitutional applications of the MBTA.
As to the BGEPA, the court held that the government has shown that its regulations further the compelling interests of preserving bald and golden eagles, and preserving recognized federal Indian tribes. It also found that the government had used the least restrictive means to do so. To expand access, as Winddancer advocated, to any sincere adherent of a Native American religion, even if the person was not a member of a recognized tribe, would create serious Establishment Clause problems.
