05/02/2016: Roman Storzer to participate in U.S. Department of Justice RLUIPA Roundtable in Detroit
The Justice Department announced the launch of “Combating Religious Discrimination Today,” a new interagency community engagement initiative designed to promote religious freedom, challenge religious discrimination and enhance enforcement of religion-based hate crimes. The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, in partnership with other federal agencies, will host a series of community roundtables across the country that focus on protecting people and places of worship from religion-based hate crimes; combating religious discrimination, including bullying, in education and employment; and addressing unlawful barriers that interfere with the construction of places of worship.
"Justice Department Announces New Interagency Initiative to Combat Religious Discrimination," Mar. 8, 2016
02/11/2016: Conservative Review discusses RLUIPA, "a younger law that works just as hard on the religious freedom front for almost none of the credit"
So, despite a Supreme Court ruling which declared RFRA’s application to states unconstitutional, there still remained a lingering issue of unconstitutional discrimination against religious institutions, especially due to what some scholars see as an “ever-increasing pressure by municipal authorities to limit their physical presence in America's cities and towns.” A 2001 article in the George Mason Law Review written by Roman P. Storzer & Anthony R. Picarello, Jr. outlines the law’s necessity in an ever-changing American religious landscape (in-text citations omitted):
While many continue in the form of the traditional suburban, stained-glass-and-steeple church, others view their missions differently. Some groups, especially those too small to purchase or rent real property, meet in houses belonging to members of the congregation. Others eschew the quiet suburbs in order to minister to those in a commercial or retail zone. Still others are called to an agricultural setting to pursue their religious exercise. Minority religions may have practices viewed as unfamiliar or distasteful by the general public. While all religious institutions ‘worship’ in the narrowest sense of the term, their additional activities differ widely in type and scope. By controlling where churches may locate, governments control the kind of mission they may pursue, and so risk forcing churches to conform to the community's vision … of the ‘proper’ church.
Nate Madden, "Why this little-known federal law is so important for religious freedom," Conservative Review (Feb. 11, 2016).
So, despite a Supreme Court ruling which declared RFRA’s application to states unconstitutional, there still remained a lingering issue of unconstitutional discrimination against religious institutions, especially due to what some scholars see as an “ever-increasing pressure by municipal authorities to limit their physical presence in America's cities and towns.” A 2001 article in the George Mason Law Review written by Roman P. Storzer & Anthony R. Picarello, Jr. outlines the law’s necessity in an ever-changing American religious landscape (in-text citations omitted):
While many continue in the form of the traditional suburban, stained-glass-and-steeple church, others view their missions differently. Some groups, especially those too small to purchase or rent real property, meet in houses belonging to members of the congregation. Others eschew the quiet suburbs in order to minister to those in a commercial or retail zone. Still others are called to an agricultural setting to pursue their religious exercise. Minority religions may have practices viewed as unfamiliar or distasteful by the general public. While all religious institutions ‘worship’ in the narrowest sense of the term, their additional activities differ widely in type and scope. By controlling where churches may locate, governments control the kind of mission they may pursue, and so risk forcing churches to conform to the community's vision … of the ‘proper’ church.
- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/02/why-this-little-known-federal-law-is-so-important#sthash.sFY7vEXd.dpuf
01/13/2016: Visit S&G's new Twitter resource: RLUIPALaw
RLUIPALaw is the leading Internet resource tracking opinions, news, scholarship, and other developments related to the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.
02/06/2015: 2015 GW Religious Freedom Moot Court Competition
Roman Storzer served as a quarterfinal judge in George Washington University Law School's annual religious freedom moot court competition. The 2015 problem involves claims of conscience raised by teachers against a hypothetical law in Washington, D.C. that requires teachers and administrators to carry firearms on public school property during school hours. More information available here.
09/30/2014: S&G submits opinion letter to ANC regarding historic landmark regulation of St. Thomas church
In a letter to the Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2B of the District of Columbia, S&G attorneys write:
[L]ocal opponents’ desire to have church ruins 'preserved in their original state, context and place' cannot outweigh the fundamental free exercise rights of a house of worship. Forcing a church to maintain, at its own expense and its own detriment, the remnants of a religious structure based on the desires of a few who wish only to benefit from—but not support the costs of—such structure, irrespective of the church’s needs, is neither reasonable nor permitted under the law.
The ANC 2B then adopted a resolution stating in part
Whereas, the ANC in prior church construction or renovation projects has had concerns that the HPRB does not take into account applicable constitutional and federal law–including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person Act (RLUIPA)–and that these federal laws supersede the HPRB’s own regulations and impose further limitations the HPRB’s authority.
Therefore, be it RESOLVED that ANC 2B does not object to the concept and massing of the religious component of the project and strongly urges the HPRB to take seriously its duty to follow applicable federal law–including RFRA and RLUIPA–by not imposing undue burdens on the use of this property for religious purposes;
Read our opinion letter here and the ANC's Resolution here.
08/16/2014: RLUIPA law review article by S&G attorneys selected for inclusion in Thomson Reuters' Zoning and Planning Law Handbook, 2014 edition
“Christian Parking, Hindu Parking: Applying Established Civil Rights Principles to RLUIPA’s Nondiscrimination Provision,” published at 16 Rich. J. L. & Pub. Int. 295 (2013), has been selected to be reprinted in the Zoning and Planning Law Handbook. The Handbook "opens with a survey of recent developments in zoning and land use law, including Supreme Court and lower court decisions and legislative and administrative activity. The handbook offers a cutting-edge perspective on the most critical land use, zoning law, and conservation issues of our time."
Purchase information available here.
03/12/2014: S&G becomes a Cooperating Organization with the PBS "God In America" series Defending Religious Liberty in the 21st Century
Storzer & Greene, P.L.L.C. welcomes God in America viewers to our website at www.storzerandgreene.com, which contains information about our work in the modern day defense of religious liberty. The pages located here describe various kinds of government actions that inhibit the rights of people to freely practice their religious faith. Our cases involve the Amish, Native Americans, Buddhists, various Christian denominations, Hindus, Jews, Muslims and others. We believe that religious liberty for all is a critical part of our American experience.
Read more about the "God in America" series here, and the full list of participating organizations here.
One of the major threats to religious liberty today is local government attempts to limit religious communities building or improving their facilities through zoning and land use laws. These issues were specifically addressed by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), a federal statute enacted to clarify the rights of religious groups to build churches, temples, synagogues, mosques, religious schools, fellowship halls, social service facilities and more. Many of the stories you will see on these pages deal with our work in this sphere. Both Mr. Storzer and Mr. Greene have been involved in RLUIPA cases since its enactment. You will also find a link here to our writing, conference details, and the U.S. Department of Justice’s recent report on the 10th Anniversary of RLUIPA.
We see our work as the modern day extension of the efforts of the early American champions of religious liberty, those seen in the God In America seers and others such as WIlliam Penn and Roger Williams. We hope this site helps round out your knowledge of the ongoing efforts to continue the work of the Founders.
03/12/2014: Storzer & Greene attorneys co-author article on RLUIPA's "Nondiscrimination" provision
Examining 42 U.S.C. 2000cc(b)(2)--which prohibits "government [from] impos[ing] or implement[ing] a land use regulation that discriminates against any assembly or institution on the basis of religion or religious denomination"--the authors argue that the law's protections are needed now more than ever:
While there is ample evidence of discrimination—both overt and surreptitious—violative of RLUIPA, some commentators continue to argue that religious groups simply do not face discrimination during the land use regulation process and that stakeholders in such regulation are only concerned with legitimate land use issues. They are plainly wrong. While there is no question that local zoning boards and other regulatory bodies are often motivated by sincere concerns about matters such as traffic, environmental protection, and adherence to building codes, it is also true that such reasons are often used as a façade for invidious discrimination. Also, it is far more frequent that minority faiths and those that are unfamiliar to local residents suffer from such intolerance
Christian Parking, Hindu Parking: Applying Established Civil Rights Principles to RLUIPA's Nondiscrimination Provision, 16 Richmond J. of L. and the Public Interest 295 (Winter 2013).