Law Commons^™

Paliotta V. State Dep’T Of Corrections, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 58 (Sept. 14, 2017), Anna Sichting

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined it must consider the sincere religious beliefs of the individual when evaluating claims under the Free Exercise Clause and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). It is improper to evaluate those claims under the centrality test, which attempts to determine if the individual’s beliefs are central to a tenant of the religion in question. Once the sincere belief is shown, the courts must then fully examine the remaining considerations under the Free Exercise Clause and the RLUIPA.

Sex, Drugs, And Eagle Feathers: An Empirical Study Of Federal Religious Freedom Cases, Luke W. Goodrich

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article presents one of the first empirical studies of federal religious freedom cases since the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Hobby Lobby. Critics of Hobby Lobby predicted that it would open the floodgates to a host of novel claims, transforming “religious freedom” from a shield for protecting religious minorities into a sword for imposing Christian values in the areas of abortion, contraception, and gay rights.

Our study finds that this prediction is unsupported. Instead, we find that religious freedom cases remain scarce. Successful cases are even scarcer. Religious minorities remain significantly overrepresented in religious freedom cases; Christians remain significantly …

Third-Party Harms, Congressional Statutes Accommodating Religion, And The Establishment Clause, Carl H. Esbeck

Faculty Publications

Those disappointed with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), are actively seeking ways to otherwise limit the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissenting in Hobby Lobby, wrote that when a statute seeks to accommodate a claimant’s religious beliefs or practices there must be no detrimental effect on third parties who do not share those beliefs. Although it is unclear whether Justice Ginsburg was relying on the Establishment Clause as imposing this categorical restraint on the authority of Congress, some commentators argue that her thinking necessarily rests on that clause. …

Telescoping And Collectivizing Religious Free Exercise Rights, Henry L. Chambers Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

If courts are willing to expand religious liberty so that people may be allowed to choose-on the basis of their own religious beliefs-whether certain laws will apply to non-religious entities they create, those courts should take that step very carefully. This Paper explores the issue and pro- ceeds as follows. Part I discusses three recent Supreme Court cases that il- luminate the telescoping and the collectivization of free exercise rights. Part II considers problems that accompany telescoping and collectivizing free exercise rights. Part III suggests how courts should critically evaluate the telescoping and collectivizing of free exercise rights. This Paper …

The Right To Enforce: Why Rluipa's Land Use Provisions Is A Constitutional Federal Enforcement Power, Qasim Rashid

Law Student Publications

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) superseded the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“RFRA”), which the Supreme Court held unconstitutional in its application to states in 1997. A two-pronged law, RLUIPA protects prisoners from unjust impositions to their freedom of worship and also ensures religious institutions may use their property for legitimate worship purposes without burdensome zoning law restrictions. This paper focuses specifically on the latter prong and analyzes RLUIPA in light of the growing Islamophobia in America during the previous twenty-four months. For example, the United States Department of Justice reports “of the eighteen RLUIPA matters involving …

Once We Were Slaves, Now We Are Free: Legal, Administrative, And Social Issues Raised By Passover Celebrations In Prison, Aviva A. Orenstein

Articles by Maurer Faculty

"Once we were slaves, now we are free" is a central line from the Jewish Passover Seder, a ritual meal in which participants retell the story of liberation from Pharaoh's oppression. In prison, many Jewish inmates request access to a Seder and to kosher-for-Passover food for the eight-day holiday. Prisoners' requests to celebrate Passover provide a rich example for exploring the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act (RLUIPA) and raise a host of tough questions regarding cost, safety, equal treatment of prisoners, and establishment of religion. Because kosher-for-Passover meals are more expensive and generally of higher quality than regular …

Condemning Religion: Rluipa And The Politics Of Eminent Domain, Christopher Serkin, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Should religious landowners enjoy special protection from eminent domain? A recent federal statute, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), compels courts to apply a compelling interest test to zoning and landmarking regulations that substantially burden religiously owned property. That provision has been controversial in itself, but today a new cutting-edge issue is emerging: whether the Act’s extraordinary protection should extend to condemnation as well. The matter has taken on added significance in the wake of Kelo, where the Supreme Court reaffirmed its expansive view of the eminent domain power. In this Article, we argue that RLUIPA should …

God And The Land: A Holy War Between Religious Exercise And Community Planning And Development, Patricia E. Salkin, Amy Lavine

Scholarly Works

This article is a brief introduction to The Albany Government Law Review symposium on God and the Land. This piece sets forth a brief history of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) setting the backdrop for the controversy that has surrounded the Act and its impact on religious entities and municipalities. Since the enactment of RLUIPA, the floodgates have burst open with litigation in attempts to clarify many ambiguities in the statute. The remainder of the piece provides a sneak preview of the articles contained in The Albany Government Law Review by Professors Angela Carmella, Marci Hamilton, …

The Genesis Of Rluipa And Federalism: Evaluating The Creation Of A Federal Statutory Right And Its Impact On Local Government, Patricia E. Salkin, Amy Lavine

Scholarly Works

In 2000, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), designed to provide protection from discrimination for the exercise of religion for incarcerated individuals and for those in need of various municipal permits or approvals in order to exercise their religion. With seven years of experience in the courts, this article examines the impact of RLUIPA on local governments across the country through an analysis of how the courts have been interpreting and applying statutory ambiguities and creating inconsistent doctrine in an effort to define terms and implement RLUIPA's protections. Whether an appropriate …

Beyond Worship: The Religious Land Use And Institutionalized Persons Act Of 2000 And Religious Institutions' Auxiliary Uses, Sara C. Bronin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Religious institutions have long offered their congregants services that go beyond worship. Particularly in the last two decades, they have begun expanding far beyond their traditional offerings to a wider and more diverse array of auxiliary uses - non-worship uses that are affiliated with a religious institution. (One type of large religious institution, the megachurch, is fast gaining members by offering schools, community centers, dining facilities, even movie theaters and gymnasiums.) Government has long granted special protections to the worship uses of religious institutions. A recent federal law - the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA) …

Old Ground And New Directions At Sacred Sites On The Western Landscape, Kristen A. Carpenter

Publications

The federal public lands contain places with both religious and secular value for American people. American Indians, in particular, hold certain natural features to be sacred, and visit them for ceremonies and worship. Simultaneously, non-Indians use the same places for economic, recreation, and many other purposes - and conflicts arise between these groups. In the past twenty years, a body of constitutional jurisprudence has developed to address questions of religious freedoms and public access rights on these lands that are owned and managed by the federal government. This article outlines the relevant First Amendment framework as well as recent statutes …