This from guest-blogger Gene Sisk at Volokh::

The enduring legal myth is that members of minority religious groups face a decidedly uphill battle in securing accommodation for unconventional religious practices, expression, or values from the courts. According to the conventional wisdom, traditional Christian believers may anticipate a more hospitable welcome from the judiciary when asserting claims of conscience or religious liberty. However based upon our empirical study of religious liberty decisions in the federal courts, the proposition that minority religions are less successful with their claims was found to be without support, at least in the modern era and in the lower federal courts. In fact, counter to popular belief, adherents to traditionalist Christian faiths, notably Roman Catholics and Baptists, appear to be the ones that today enter the courthouse doors at a disadvantage.

For those concerned with religion and the courts, the rest of this, and Gene’s whole series, are a must read.

As I commented at Volokh: My initial reaction is that those of nominally “Christian” faiths are more a target currently, because the practices of other religions, which the secular state have found abhorrent, have already been adequately circumscribed by the courts.

But I find this most interesting, and will follow these posts “religiously”.