Yesterday the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals issued a lengthy opinion interpreting the anti-discrimination provision of RLUIPA. The section prohibits land use regulations that treat religious institutions "on less than equal terms" than nonreligious ones. In The Lighthouse Institute for Evangelism, Inc. v. City of Long Branch, (3d Cir., Nov. 27, 2007), the court, in a 2-1 decision, held that Long Branch, NJ did not violate the section when under a redevelopment plan it excluded churches and religious assemblies from an area zoned for entertainment and recreation.
The court held that the "equal terms" provision does not require a church to show that a "substantial burden" has been been placed on its religious exercise. However, it does require plaintiff to show that it was treated less well than a secular organization that has a similar negative impact on the aims of the challenged land-use regulation. Churches are not similarly situated because New Jersey law prohibits the issuance of a liquor license to establishments located within 200 feet of a church. The court also rejected plaintiff Lighthouse's claim under the First Amendment's Free Exercise clause, finding that its exclusion from a small area of the city did not burden its religious exercise, and that the redevelopment plan was a neutral regulation of general applicability. The court did however permit an award of damages under RLUPA for previous injury caused by a now-superseded zoning ordinance.
Judge Jordan, dissenting in part, argued that the "equal terms" provision of RLUIPA is violated when a zoning ordinance categorically excludes churches from an area where secular assemblies are permitted, without the church being required show that it is similarly situated in regard to the regulation's purpose. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to How Appealing via Alliance Alert for the lead.]
