On The Front Lines
Rutherford Institute Attorneys Protect California Church's Right to Build House of Worship on Church Property
ONTARIO, Calif. -- Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have succeeded in helping a California church prevail against an attempt by city officials to use local zoning ordinances to prevent the church from building a house of worship. Institute attorneys cite recent rulings under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), which forbids state and local governments from imposing or implementing a zoning or landmark law in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on religious exercise, as having contributed to the settlement in which city officials agreed to allow the Church of the Light to proceed with plans to build a church. Since its passage in 2000, RLUIPA has been hailed as an important protection for religious exercise in America. However, it has also been challenged on numerous fronts. For example, this term the U.S. Supreme Court is set to determine whether RLUIPA's provisions protecting the religious exercise of persons residing or confined to certain institutions holds a "message of endorsement" of religion as the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals declared, which thereby violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. To read The Rutherford Institute's Supreme Court brief in Jon B. Cutter, et al. v. Reginald Wilkinson, et al., click here (PDF)."I commend the City of Ontario for finally settling this case and, by their actions, sending the message that they are committed to protecting religious liberty," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "This case clearly illustrates the importance and relevance of legislation like the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act that serves to safeguard the free exercise of religion."
Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute came to the assistance of the Church of the Light in 1998, in their lawsuit against the City of Ontario, Calif.. The Church of the Light had purchased property in the City of Ontario, after verifying that the property was properly zoned and could be used for religious assembly. Nevertheless, five days after the city adopted an ordinance requiring new, but not preexisting, religious organizations to obtain a permit, the city's Development Advisory Board denied the church's plan for the use of the property for religious assembly. Institute attorneys charged that the City of Ontario's denial of a conditional use permit to allow the church to build a house of worship violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. Institute attorneys filed a second amended complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in October 2002, which added a claim under RLUIPA, which had not been in effect at the time the initial lawsuit was filed. Under RLUIPA, the city would have been required to show that it had a compelling interest in denying the church the opportunity to build its house of worship at the chosen site. After two years of negotiations, the city ceded to the church's claims and settled the case.
The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.
Related links:
Sign-up to receive The Rutherford Institute's Insider Report E-newsletter!
Sign-up to receive John W. Whitehead's Weekly Column today!
Sound Off! Tell us what you think about this news story!
Get your free copy of the Bill of Rights!
Support the Fight! Give Today!
Rutherford News Archives
Recent Victories!
The Rutherford Institute
|
