the Equal Terms provision is squarely implicated by the City's decision to revoke its earlier granted pre-consideration for the Church when other food-service and catering businesses, associated with non-religious groups, operating in the same neighborhood as Plaintiff, also in violation of the Zoning Resolution, were given only a "Notice of Violation."Finding that the 2nd Circuit had not interpreted the RLUIPA's equal terms provision, the court held that under either the 3rd or 11th Circuits' competing interpretations, Plaintiff would prevail. The court also expressed concern over the City's policy of investigating zoning violations only when a complaint is filed. This can lead to "unfair targeting of unpopular groups." Yesterday's New York Times reported on the decision. (See prior related posting.)
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
RLUIPA Protects New York Church's Catering Activities From Adverse Zoning Action
In Third Church of Christ, Scientist v. City of New York, (SDNY, Dec. 2, 2008), a New York federal district court, applying the "equal terms provision" of RLUIPA, enjoined the city from revoking previously granted approval for a church to use its building for catering activities. The city argued that the catering activities were no longer an "accessory use." Rather they had become so extensive that use of the building as a church by the declining congregation's membership was no longer the building's primary use. The court was troubled that this interpretation would permit smaller religious groups to be treated less favorably than larger ones. Ultimately however the court said that it did not need to resolve the issue of "accessory use" because