Appellate Section
RELIGION CASES
-
Nelson v. Miller (7th Cir.) -- Amicus
-
The magistrate applied an erroneous standard in finding that the denial of the non-meat diet on the grounds that it was not required by Nelson’s religion did not impose a substantial burden on Nelson’s religious exercise within the meaning of that term in RLUIPA
-
Digrugilliers v. Consolidated City of Indianapolis (7th Cir.) -- Amicus
-
The district court erred in concluding that the church had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of its RLUIPA “equal terms” claim
-
Hollywood Community Synagogue & United States v. City of Hollywood (11th Cir.) -- Appellee
-
The district court did not err in denying appellants’ motion to intervene
-
Appellants cannot challenge the entry of the consent decree on the ground that the district court should first have held a hearing
-
Westchester Day School v. Village of Mamaroneck (2d Cir.) -- Intervenor & Amicus
-
The district court correctly upheld the constitutionality of RLUIPA
-
The district court properly concluded that defendants substantially burdened plaintiff’s religious exercise, and failed to demonstrate that the substantial burden was imposed to further a compelling governmental interest in the least restrictive manner
-
Lighthouse Institute for Evangelism v. City of Long Branch (3d Cir.) -- Amicus
-
The equal terms provision of RLUIPA does not contain a substantial burden requirement
-
Faith Temple Church v. Town of Brighton (2d Cir.) -- Amicus
-
Taking Faith Temple’s property pursuant to the comprehensive plan would constitute the imposition or implementation of a land use regulation under RLUIPA
-
Living Water Church of God v. Meridian Charter Township
(6th Cir.) -- Amicus
-
Denial of the SUP constitutes a substantial burden on the church's
religious exercise
-
The Township did not use the least restrictive means to serve a
compelling governmental interest
-
Bush v. Holmes (Fla. Sup. Ct.) -- Amicus
-
The Florida Court of Appeals erred in holding that Locke v. Davey barred
appellants' Free Exercise Clause claim
-
This court's doctrine of constitutional avoidance suggests that this
court should maintain its prior construction of the no-aid provision and
uphold the scholarship program
-
Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries v. Glover
(9th Cir.) -- Amicus
-
The County engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination by
denying Faith Center equal access to the Antioch meeting rooms
-
There is no practical or constitutionally permissible basis to
distinguish worship from religious viewpoints in a broadly defined forum
-
Permitting Faith Center to use Antioch's meeting room on equal terms
with other community groups does not violate the Establishment Clause
-
Barnes-Wallace v. Boy Scouts of America (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
-
The Boy Scouts is not a religious organization for purposes of Establishment
Clause analysis
-
Even if the Boy Scouts is considered religious, the leases are value-for-value
contracts, not "aid" to a religious organization
-
Even assuming the Boy Scouts is a religious organization and the leases are
"aid," such aid would not violate the Constitution
-
Saints Constantine & Helen Greek Orthodox Church, Inc.
(7th Cir.) -- Amicus
-
The district court incorrectly applied CLUB's standard for assessing facial
violations of RLUIPA's substantial burden provision to this as-applied challenge
-
Guru Nanak Sikh Society v. County of Sutter
(9th Cir.) -- Intervenor/Amicus
-
The district court correctly found that the county's denial of Guru Nanak's
application for a use permit constituted a substantial burden in violation of
Section 2 (a)(1) of RLUIPA
-
RLUIPA Section 2(a)(1), as made applicable by Section 2(a)(2)(c), is a valid
exercise of Congress's Section 5 powers because it codifies established
constitutional principles
-
Muhammed v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction
(6th Cir.) -- Intervenor-Appellee
-
Title VII's prohibition of religious discrimination, including its
accommodation requirement, is valid Section 5 legislation
-
Midrash Sephardi, Inc. v. Town of Surfside
(11th Cir.) -- Amicus/Intervenor
-
Surfside's zoning scheme violates Section 2(b)(1) of RLUIPA because it
treats religious assemblies on less than equal terms with similarly situated
secular assemblies
-
The plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to survive summary judgment as
to whether Surfside's zoning scheme imposes a substantial burden on their
exercise of religion in violation of Section 2(a)(1) of RLUIPA
-
The RLUIPA sections at issue are a valid exercise of Congress's authority
under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment and under the Commerce Clause
-
Child Evangelism Fellowship of Maryland v. Montgomery County Public
Schools (4th Cir.) -- Amicus
-
The district court erred in balancing the imminent harm to CEF against the
potential harm to Defendants-Appellees when considering CEF's motion for
preliminary injunction
-
The board engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination by denying
CEF equal access to its folder forum
-
Permitting CEF to promote its after-school activities on equal terms with
other community organizations does not violate the Establishment Clause
-
Child Evangelism Fellowship of New Jersey v. Stafford Township School
District (3d Cir.) -- Amicus
-
Stafford engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination by denying CEF
equal access to its community communications system
-
Permitting CEF to promote its after-school activities on equal terms with other
community organizations does not violate the Establishment Clause
-
Donovan v. Punxsutawney Area School District
(3d Cir.) -- Amicus
-
Denying FISH access to the limited open forum the school has created during
the activities period violates the Equal Access Act
-
Denying plaintiff an equal opportunity to hold club meetings during the activity
period violates the First Amendment
-
Bronx Household of Faith v. Board
of Education of the City of NY (2d Cir.) -- Amicus
-
Bronx Household's activities fall easily within the broad contours of the
school's facility use policy and its exclusion is, thus, viewpoint discrimination
-
There is no practical or constitutionally permissible basis to distinguish
worship and religious viewpoints in a broadly defined forum
-
Permitting Bronx Household to rent school facilities on equal terms with
others does not violate the Establishment Clause
-
The City's proposed policy modification to exclude religious sermons and
services is not constitutionally permissible
-
Permitting Bronx Household to continue to rent school facilities on
equal terms with others does not violate the Establishment Clause
-
The Board engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination by denying Bronx Household equal access to the school
Browse Briefs by Category
Affirmative Action
Americans with Disabilities Act and
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act
Constitutionality of Federal Statutes
Criminal
Education
Employment Discrimination (Race, National Origin, Sex,
and Religion)
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
Housing
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Religion Cases
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Voting
Other
Updated March 10, 2009
