Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act

From Conservapedia
(Redirected from RLUIPA)
Jump to: navigation, search

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc to cc-5, was enacted by Congress in response to the U.S. Supreme Court holding in City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507, 536 (1997), which had invalidated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as applied to the states because Congress exceeded its powers under the Fourteenth Amendment's enforcement clause. The RLUIPA was designed such that it "applies only to the extent that Congress has power to regulate under the Commerce Clause, the Spending Clause, or Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment." 146 Cong. Rec. S7774 (daily ed. July 27, 2000) (joint statement of Sens. Hatch and Kennedy).

Congress passed the RLUIPA in September 2000 to require courts to apply the same heightened scrutiny of RFRA (an analysis of "compelling interest"/"least restrictive means") to land use and prison regulations burdening the exercise of religion. RFRA applies to all federal regulations.

RLUIPA requires that it be interpreted broadly to favor the protection of inmates' exercise of their religious beliefs. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-3(g). Accordingly, RLUIPA grants to prisoners engaged in religious conduct federal statutory protections that are greater than those protected by the First Amendment. See, e.g., Gregory S. Walston, Federalism and Federal Spending: Why the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 is Unconstitutional, 23 U. Haw. L. Rev. 479, 480 (2001) ("Remarkably, RLUIPA confers greater religious rights on inmates than on free citizens.").

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act prohibits the government from imposing a "substantial burden on the religious exercise" of a prisoner, unless the burden "(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest." 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1. RLUIPA applies to every case where:

(1) the substantial burden is imposed in a program or activity that receives Federal financial assistance; or
(2) the substantial burden affects, or removal of that substantial burden would affect, commerce with foreign nations, among the several States, or with Indian tribes.

See also

  • Amish litigation
  • Charles v. Verhagen, 220 F. Supp. 2d 937, 942-43 (W.D. Wis. 2002)
Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Religious_Land_Use_and_Institutionalized_Persons_Act&oldid=1870052"