An Ohio law requiring an Amish religious sect that shuns technology to attach flashing electric lights to its horse-drawn buggies is now on hold, thanks in part to a team of students from Harvard Law School.
The group, all members of the school’s Religious Freedom Clinic, traveled to rural Kenton, Ohio, in November to help represent the Swartzentruber Amish community, with the students advocating in court for its constitutional right to religious freedom.
Law students Cole Cooper ’25, Mason Laney ’26, Jack Lucas ’25, and Gabrielle Spurlock ’26 argued in a preliminary injunction hearing on behalf of the Swartzentrubers, alongside Steven Burnett, an instructional fellow at the clinic, and Assistant Clinical Professor Josh McDaniel, the clinic’s director. The students argued that the light law was irreparably harming the Swartzentrubers by burdening their religious rights, so the court should block enforcement while the litigation proceeds.
“I’ll never forget it,” said Laney. “Professor McDaniel was standing outside the courthouse with 30 Amish men, and they’re the most intentional listeners you will ever meet. And they’re all listening to him as he explains exactly what had happened in the courtroom, what it means, and what the next steps are. In that moment, I was thinking, ‘This is why I want to be a lawyer.’ “
The case came to the clinic last year through a local Amish and Mennonite scholar, Dr. Cory Anderson, who acted as an intermediary between the clinic and the Swartzentrubers. The Swartzentruber sect is one of the most conservative Amish communities. Its members do not use cars, phones, or nearly any modern technology. In addition, their faith opposes aggression, which for them often includes litigation. But they are permitted to accept pro-bono legal assistance to challenge the constitutionality of a law that they believe infringes on their religious exercise.
The arguments
The clinic’s involvement follows rising tension between local law enforcement and the Swartzentruber Amish over the flashing light requirement. The contested law enacted in 2022 requires yellow flashing lights on buggies at all times.
For decades, Ohio allowed the Swartzentrubers to use oil lamps and reflective tape as an alternative to electric lights. But advocates of the recent regulation argue that electric lights should be mandatory to improve road safety and prevent crashes.
The Swartzentrubers quickly felt negative repercussions from the law in their community.
“At least four people have been jailed because they have a religious objection to paying fines for tickets related to their religious practices. Someone else’s buggy has been towed,” said Spurlock. “We learned in our meetings the day before the hearing that some people are choosing to walk rather than use their buggies at all because they’re scared of any involvement with the law. People are walking on major highways, which is even more dangerous than riding a buggy without a flashing light.”

The team’s legal strategy focused on Ohio’s constitution, which provides strong protections for freedom of conscience. “Our primary argument has two steps,” Cooper said. “The first step is establishing that strict scrutiny is the right analysis to apply to the law at issue. Ohio’s state constitution is very protective of religious liberty, so as long as a law places a burden on someone’s sincere religious belief, Ohio’s constitution is going to require that it undergo strict scrutiny.”
The second piece of their argument pointed to alternative ways that Ohio could advance highway safety. “Ohio’s Department of Transportation identified 13 other ways to make Amish travel safer, none of which required the flashing light that goes against the Swartzentrubers’ sincere religious conviction,” Cooper said. Alternatives include buggy lanes, buggy-detection lights on the roads, or broader systemic changes. “For example, if Ohio wants to make the highway safer, it could regulate other forms of transit that unfortunately result in more accidents and fatalities every year, like motorcycles or bicycles.”
The students noted that the case wasn’t straightforward. “The biggest thing that was holding a lot of people back from even taking this case in the first place is that [Ohio’s regulation] felt like a very sensible regulation on its face,” Laney said. “These buggies are all black, pretty wide, and a lot of the roads aren’t designed for them, so they take up a lot of space.”
However, the data told another story, according to the law students. “When we looked at the data, we realized accidents are primarily caused by recklessness in cars. It’s drivers who are not paying attention to the road and get distracted,” Laney said.
Spurlock added that the law might actually prove counterproductive: “There’s not a lot of data that this flashing light does improve safety at all. There’s something called a moth effect: If there’s a flashing light, it may actually draw other cars towards it and cause more accidents.”
Working with clients and the court
After months of preparation on campus in the clinic, the students and instructors arrived in Ohio ready to represent their clients, but first the Swartzentrubers kicked off their visit with a warm welcoming meal in the home of a community member.
“We had dinner with them by light from an oil lamp, and it was so peaceful. We got to see the cohesion of their community, and it was amazing to be welcomed into their homes. We made every effort to be as considerate as possible with their customs and show them that we really believe in their cause,” said Spurlock.
“They were incredibly hospitable and generous,” added Cooper. “We spent hours with them over dinner, getting them up to speed on recent developments with the case. We got everyone’s perspective on the light law and how it had been impacting them.”
On the day of the hearing, the clinic team drove to the courthouse, where buggies were already parked alongside motor vehicles. The courtroom was packed with members of the Swartzentruber community, and more waiting outside. A nervous energy coursed through the students, unsure whether they would be permitted to lead the arguments after long days and nights of preparation.
“Professor McDaniel told the judge that he would love for his students to argue,” said Laney. “And the judge said, ‘I always wanted to do this as a law student too, so go for it. Just make sure that you each argue separately.’ ” Each student then presented part of the argument to the judge.
Cooper emphasized how thoroughly their legal education prepared them for the moment: “Halfway through my argument, I was in the back of my mind thinking this is just like 1L Ames. This is just like what we’ve been prepared to do. I thought it was really cool to see that we’re not just learning legal philosophy here. We’re learning how to be lawyers.”
The courtroom anxiously awaited the outcome, and good news arrived swiftly for the Amish.
“At the end of the arguments, with so many of the Amish sitting behind us, to hear the judge say, ‘I find irreparable harm, and I’m going to grant the restraining order,’ it was amazing,” said Laney.
Outside the courtroom, McDaniel told the Swartzentrubers that the temporary restraining order was granted, and the flashing-light law would not be enforced against the plaintiffs while litigation in the case is ongoing. Because the presiding judge found that forcing the Swartzentrubers to break the law or violate their faith constituted irreparable harm, the students expect the decision to deter enforcement against the Swartzentrubers statewide.
“Most of the Amish community didn’t know whether we had won or lost because it was all legal-speak during the hearing and when the judge was giving the final ruling,” said Lucas.
“I walked outside to one of the named plaintiffs, who I had met a year back. And then he shook my hand … and then he says, ‘I didn’t understand a word of what you said, but it sounded great.’ And then they all turned to Professor McDaniel and asked, ‘Did we win?’ “
The result is a win for now, and in July the students will return to Ohio to seek to make that ruling permanent.
Meeting their clients and seeing the outcome of their representation in the community had a profound effect on the students. “It felt good to have a real-world impact,” Cooper said, “doing exactly what we all hoped to do when we joined the clinic.”
“This was my first time doing legal work for individual clients: meeting them, having them come to the courtroom, and getting to explain the decision to them,” said Spurlock. “It was so much more meaningful than any other corporate work that I’ve done before. In the future, I will definitely be seeking out more of that, trying to have an impact on individual people’s lives.”
“You can’t walk away from that experience not changed,” Laney added. “You’ve learned something. You’ve been impacted in a way that makes you want to keep doing what we do.”
Want to stay up to date with Harvard Law Today? Sign up for our weekly newsletter.