Last fall, the Second Circuit decided Chabad Lubavitch of Litchfield County, Inc. v. Borough of Litchfield, 786 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2014), reversing the lower court’s order of summary judgment in favor of the Borough of Litchfield on Chabad’s claims under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Chabad sought to expand its existing building, a 1870’s stick-style Victorian known as the “Deming House,” within Litchfield’s Historic District. Although the parties contest the total square footage requested for expansion, the Borough asserts that Chabad’s plans show as 17,000-square-foot addition and Chabad has not provided plans with a smaller footprint. Our report on the Second Circuit’s decision is available here.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut concluded there was no substantial burden “as a matter of law” because Connecticut’s statutory scheme governing historic districts is “neutral and generally applicable,” and could not impose a substantial burden unless applied arbitrarily, capriciously, or unlawfully.

The Second Circuit reversed and remanded for consideration on Chabad’s substantial burden claim because the Borough’s review of Chabad’s application “was an ‘individual assessment’ subject to RLUIPA’s substantial burden provision…” It also remanded Chabad’s nondiscrimination claim, noting that “Chabad need not cite an ‘identical comparator to establish a claim under RLUIPA’s nondiscrimination provision.” The Court did, however, uphold the District Court’s determination that Chabad failed to establish a valid RLUIPA equal terms comparator to support its claim.

Recently, the Borough petitioned the United States Supreme Court to take the case and consider whether a substantial burden can be imposed by a neutral law of general applicability if applied in a rational manner. The Borough urges the Court to rule

that under our First Amendment, religious organizations must follow neutral and generally applicable land use regulations in the same manner as do secular applicants; that a law can be neutral and generally applicable if it is applied with standards giving the commission or board reasonable discretion; that an “individualized assessment” arises only when a law, on its face, gives exemption for secular uses not provided to religious uses; and, to the extent that RLUIPA conflicts with these principles, it is unconstitutional and void.

The Borough presented Employment Division v. Smith, 494 US 872 (1990) and City of Borne v. Flores, 521 US 507 (1997) as the legal foundation for its position. RLUIPA, the Borough argues, is a “legislative mandate which follows Sherbert v. Verner, rather than the judicial standard set by this Court in Smith.” The petition argues that Congress impermissibly rewrote the constitutional standard established by the Court in Smith.

RLUIPA Defense will keep an eye on this petition and keep our readers updated on any progression. The Borough’s petition is available here.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Evan Seeman Evan Seeman

Evan J. Seeman is a lawyer in Robinson+Cole’s Hartford office and focuses his practice on land use, real estate, environmental, and regulatory matters, representing local governments, developers and advocacy groups. He has spoken and written about RLUIPA, and was a lead author of…

Evan J. Seeman is a lawyer in Robinson+Cole’s Hartford office and focuses his practice on land use, real estate, environmental, and regulatory matters, representing local governments, developers and advocacy groups. He has spoken and written about RLUIPA, and was a lead author of an amicus curiae brief at the petition stage before the United States Supreme Court in a RLUIPA case entitled City of San Leandro v. International Church of the Foursquare Gospel.

Evan serves as the Secretary/Treasurer of the APA’s Planning & Law Division. He also serves as the Chair of the Planning & Zoning Section of the Connecticut Bar Association’s Young Lawyers Section, and is the former Co-Chair of its Municipal Law Section. He has been named to the Connecticut Super Lawyers® list as a Rising Star in the area of Land Use Law for 2013 and 2014. He received his B.A. in political science and Russian studies (with honors) from Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, where he was selected as the President’s Fellow in the Department of Modern Languages and Literature. Evan received his Juris Doctor at the University of Connecticut School of Law, where he served on the Connecticut Law Review. While in law school, he interned with the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General in the environmental department, and served as a judicial intern for the judges of the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Court. Following law school, Evan clerked for the Honorable F. Herbert Gruendel of the Connecticut Appellate Court.

Photo of Dwight Merriam Dwight Merriam

Dwight H. Merriam founded Robinson+Cole’s Land Use Group in 1978. He represents land owners, developers, governments and individuals in land use matters, with a focus on defending governments in RLUIPA cases. Dwight is a Fellow and Past President of the American Institute of…

Dwight H. Merriam founded Robinson+Cole’s Land Use Group in 1978. He represents land owners, developers, governments and individuals in land use matters, with a focus on defending governments in RLUIPA cases. Dwight is a Fellow and Past President of the American Institute of Certified Planners, a former Director of the American Planning Association (APA), a former chair of APA’s Planning and Law Division, Immediate Past Chair of the American Bar Association’s Section of State and Local Government Law, Chair of the Institute of Local Government Studies at the Center for American and International Law, a Fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation, a member of the Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute National Advisory Board, a Fellow of the Connecticut Bar Foundation, a Counselor of Real Estate, a member of the Anglo-American Real Property Institute, and a Fellow of the American College of Real Estate Lawyers.

He teaches land use law at the University of Connecticut School of Law and at Vermont Law School and has published over 200 articles and eight books, including Inclusionary Zoning Moves Downtown, The Takings Issue, The Complete Guide to Zoning, and Eminent Domain Use and Abuse: Kelo in Context. He is the senior co-author of the leading casebook on land use law, Planning and Control of Land Development (Eighth Edition). Dwight has written and spoken widely on how to avoid RLUIPA claims and how to successfully defend against them in court. He is currently writing a book on the subject, RLUIPA DEFENSE, for the American Bar Association.

Dwight has been named to the Connecticut Super Lawyers® list in the area of Land Use Law since 2006, is one of the Top 50 Connecticut Super Lawyers in Connecticut, and is one of the Top 100 New England Super Lawyers (Super Lawyers is a registered trademark of Key Professional Media, Inc.). He received his B.A. (cum laude) from the University of Massachusetts, his Masters of Regional Planning from the University of North Carolina, where he was the graduation speaker in 2011, and his J.D. from Yale. He is a featured speaker at many land use seminars, and presents monthly audio land use seminars for the International Municipal Lawyers Association. Dwight has been cited in the national press from The New York Times to People magazine and has appeared on NBC’s The Today Show, MSNBC and public television.

Dwight also had a career in the Navy, serving for three tours in Vietnam aboard ship, then returning to be the Senior Advisor of the Naval ROTC Unit at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill where he taught Defense Administration and Military Management as an Assistant Professor in the undergraduate and graduate curriculum in Defense Administration and Military Management. He left active duty after seven years to attend law school, but continued on for 24 more years as a reserve Surface Warfare Officer with two major commands, including that of the reserve commanding officer of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center. He retired as a Captain in 2009 after 31 years of service.