Judge: Law protecting church locations unconstitutional

| Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:00 PM PDT ∞

WILLIAM FINN BENNETT
Staff Writer

LAKE ELSINORE ---- The city was both winner and loser in federal court this week: a loser because the judge said the city violated federal law, but a winner because he determined that a portion of that same law is unconstitutional.

As a result, an appeals court may be asked to sort it all out.

Attorneys for Elsinore Christian Center had sued the city in 2001, after the city denied the church a permit to move to a downtown commercial building.

Church attorneys filed the suit based on alleged violations of a 2000 federal law ---- the Religious Land Use & Institutionalized Persons Act ---- which prohibits state and local governments from discriminating against religious organizations in their zoning or land-use policies. They also based the suit on alleged violations of Elsinore Christian Center's First Amendment rights to free-speech, freedom of assembly and free exercise of religion.

At the time the dispute arose, the church wanted to buy and renovate an old grocery store and move its congregation to the new location, where it said there would be more room and more parking for church members.

City officials denied the permit, saying that the city would lose sales-tax revenue and downtown residents would lose their only market.

As the litigation worked its way through the court system, the owner sold to another buyer. Today, the building houses a supermarket specializing in Latino food.

Los Angeles federal court Judge Stephen V. Wilson wrote in his ruling that the city's decision not to grant the permit presented a "substantial burden," in specific violation of the 2000 law.

A portion of the law reads: "No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person ..."

The judge's ruling in favor of the church appears to be of little practical use, however, since later in his decision he concludes that the "substantial burden" clause in the federal law is unconstitutional.

He said that in approving the law in 2000, Congress had effectively redefined the First Amendment rights it was trying to enforce: "The result is likely to be, as in this case, that many land use decisions will be invalidated despite being legitimately motivated and generic in effect."

Judge Wilson has yet to make a ruling on some of the other allegations listed in the church's suit against the city. Church attorneys have also accused the city of violating other portions of the same law, relating to equal treatment of churches, discrimination and unfair exclusion, as well as the city's alleged violations of the church's First Amendment rights.

City attorney Barbara Leibold was not available Wednesday for comment. City Councilman Bob Schiffner said he was relieved with the court's decision.

"I am very happy for the city, that we are not in trouble," he said.

He said the city never had anything against the church, that its decision to deny the permit was based on the greatest need for residents.

"We felt that the use of the building as a grocery store was more important to the residents in that neighborhood," he said. "An awful of them spoke out in favor of our decision at the time."

Local attorney Robert Tyler works with religious organizations around the country in defense of religious causes and is representing the Elsinore Christian Center in its lawsuit.

He said Wednesday that in spite of the judge's decision, the battle is anything but finished.

"I am not discouraged," Tyler said. "If the case was resolved at the district court level, we would never be able to see the precedent we are desiring, which is to protect churches from zoning discrimination."

He said that once Judge Wilson has issued his other rulings on the case, he plans on filing an appeal with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

Contact staff writer William Finn Bennett at (909) 676-4315, Ext. 2624, or wbennett@californian.com.

Send to a friend - enter e-mail address: