The Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye practiced the Afro-Caribbean-based religion of Santeria. Santeria used animal sacrifice as a form of worship. Shortly after the announcement of the establishment of a Santeria church in Hialeah, Florida, the city council adopted several ordinances addressing religious sacrifice. The ordinances prohibited possession of animals for sacrifice or slaughter, with specific exemptions for state-licensed activities. In Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah (1992), the Court held that the ordinances were neither neutral nor generally applicable. The ordinances had to be justified by a compelling governmental interest and they had to be narrowly tailored to that interest. The core failure of the ordinances was that they applied exclusively to the church. The ordinances singled out the activities of the Santeria faith and suppressed more religious conduct than was necessary to achieve their stated ends. Only conduct tied to religious belief was burdened. The ordinances targeted religious behavior and therefore failed to survive the rigors of strict scrutiny.
Source: Oyez, Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah (1992)

Identify the constitutional provision that is common in both Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah (1992) and Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972).
Based on the constitutional provision identified in part (A), explain how the facts of Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah led to a similar holding in Wisconsin v. Yoder.
Explain how members of the public who disagree with the holding in Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah could act to limit its impact.