> (Aside: this would probably be legal under all the religious freedom restoration acts going around.) Under most of the RFRAs, a government with a compelling

> (Aside: this would probably be legal under all the religious freedom restoration acts going around.) Under most of the RFRAs, a government with a compelling interest (e.g. allowing the blind to take taxis) would have to use the least restrictive means to achieve it. In the case of something like a car service company or Uber, this could mean permitting individual drivers to decline the hail, but guaranteeing that someone will be available to answer it. Then, if all goes well, the blind person gets his or her ride, the religious person goes about his or her religious life without losing his job, and everyone's happy. Consider also Utah, which permits a county clerk to opt out of officiating a same-sex marriage out of religious objections... if a substitute is available. (For cities with more street-hailed cabs, in the style of London and New York, this may not be enough, but enforcement of any rules on street hails is problematic, as anyone who has tried to take a NYC taxi somewhere inconvenient is able to tell you.)