NOTE: THE RELIGIOUS LAND USE AND INSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS ACT OF 2000: AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL EXERCISE OF CONGRESS'S POWER UNDER SECTION FIVE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT Skip over navigation
LexisNexis® Browse Law Reviews and Treatises
Skip over navigation
Sign in with your lexis.com® ID to access the full text of this article.
-OR-
Order the full text of this article if you do not have a lexis.com® ID.
 
Price: 
US $22.00 (+ tax)
 
 

Copyright (c) 2002 New York University School of Law 
New York University Journal of Legislation and Public Policy

NOTE: THE RELIGIOUS LAND USE AND INSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS ACT OF 2000: AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL EXERCISE OF CONGRESS'S POWER UNDER SECTION FIVE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

2002 / 2003

6 N.Y.U. J. Legis. & Pub. Pol'y 561

Author

Joshua R. Geller*

Excerpt



Introduction
 
In 2000, President Clinton signed into law the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). 1 RLUIPA addresses land use conflicts between religious organizations and local zoning authorities, mandating that such conflicts be decided in favor of the religious organization unless the governmental interest in the matter is compelling and the government's approach is the least restrictive means of securing that interest. 2 Cases challenging RLUIPA's constitutionality are starting to percolate through the federal courts. 3

I argue that although RLUIPA addresses a serious problem of discrimination against religious institutions in land use controversies, it is nevertheless normatively unjustifiable and constitutionally infirm. The Act is normatively unjustifiable because it is based on an unacceptable theory of the free exercise of religion. This conception favors the interests of religiously motivated actors over the interests of their secular counterparts, instead of protecting religious believers who may be vulnerable to discrimination. In addition, RLUIPA is constitutionally infirm because it is an instance of Congress acting at odds with the Supreme Court on a matter of constitutional interpretation. In enacting RLUIPA, Congress exceeded its authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, because RLUIPA redefines constitutional rights. 4 To understand this two-sided problem, we must examine two distinct but related areas: substantive free exercise of religion jurisprudence and constitutional theory. In Part I, I provide a background on the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on free exercise and Section 5 preceding RLUIPA. In Part II, I explain RLUIPA's land use ...
 
 
If you are interested in obtaining a lexis.com® ID and Password, please contact us at 1-(800)-227-4908 or visit us at http://www.lexisnexis.com/.
Search Documents
 
eg., Environmental Insurance Coverage Under the Comprehensive General Liability Policy
 
 
 
 

Lexis® Web - The only search engine that delivers free web content specifically from legal sites validated by LexisNexis® attorney editors and includes tools for faster research and more relevant results.

 
LexisNexis Store
Research Now - Go to lexis.com
Connect the Dots - Free 1 hour webcast
Share. Network. Discover. - Go to LexisNexis Communities