Asbury Park: Don't fall for this scenario. Pretexts, grandiose claims, exaggeration, intimidation
Intimidating Cites, Zoning Boards et al. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20061130.html <http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20061130.html> Excerpts (but the full text at link above is eye opening): In local property disputes, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) has ushered in the era of the three-ring circus. What is missing in all three rings is integrity. The First Sideshow: A Fraternity Deems Itself "Apostles of Peace and Unity" RLUIPA licenses religious landowners to trump zoning laws, even when the religious practice that is "substantially burdened" is not central to the religion at issue. In other words, any precept that is even remotely related to some religious belief of some kind can trigger RLUIPA protection . While the government may not challenge the truth of religious beliefs, it may challenge the sincerity of the claimant. Sincerity challenges are part and parcel of standard free exercise doctrine, so there is plenty of precedent for such a challenge. nothing more than a pretext intended to circumvent valid zoning rules . If the religion is indeed proven to be a pretext, then the constitutional right to the free exercise of religion is not implicated, and the rule of law applies. The Second Ring: Religious Landowners' Organizations Intimidate Zoning Officials In the second ring of our RLUIPA circus, we have towns and cities being terrorized by overzealous organizations representing religious landowners. Even before litigation is filed, such organizations are making grandiose claims about their "win record" and their proven ability to drain city resources through RLUIPA's attorneys' fees provisions. Local officials and governments, though, need to take a deep breath before they permit themselves to be cowed by such tactics. Recently, in Tiburon, CA, the Becket Fund sent just such a letter, intended to intimidate the Town Council into permitting a local, established synagogue to put on an ambitious addition in a tightly-plotted residential neighborhood. Towns and cities need to read such letters carefully. For example, the letter threatens attorneys fees, implying they could be ruinous, by offering the following case citation, among others: Congregation Kol Ami v. Abington Township .. the Becket Fund charged that there was anti-Semitism in the denial of the synagogue's original, expansive proposal. Their website, trying to prove discrimination, went on to claim that this was the only synagogue in Marin County, which is patently untrue . Derek Gaubatz, Director of Litigation for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, applauds the ruling, saying "Make no mistake, this was a huge victory for the congregation and the First Amendment in Tiburon." This sort of public relations hyperbole, combined with the Becket Fund's predilection to count settlements (which always include a disavowal of liability by the defendants) as "victories," makes this second ring of our circus a hazard for all towns, cities, and their communities. . The Third Ring: Attempts to Invoke RLUIPA to Protect Non-Religious Land Uses . Integrity plays a role here as well. RLUIPA is an invitation to exaggerate or fudge actual building needs, but religious leaders - regardless of the legal advice they receive - need to consult their own consciences before unleashing their lawyers. So who do we blame for this three-ring circus, which is destroying relationships and neighborhoods? Congress. You cannot blame the religious entities, because they are simply taking what Congress gave them. But you can certainly take Congress to task for never considering the needs of residential neighbors abutting religious land users with ambitious expansion plans or nonreligious landowners with lively imaginations. ================================== >From a review at Click here: Amazon.com: God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law: Books: Marci A. Hamilton,Edward R. Becker <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521853044/findlaw-20> A Balanced Look at Righting Judicial Incompetence Hamilton isn't on a crusade against religion, religious organizations, or religious people .She is opposed to using "religious freedom" as justification for destroying entire neighborhoods. She is opposed to using "religious freedom" to justify forcing our prisons to spend millions of dollars "accommodating" dozens of different religious meal restrictions, religious reading requirements, and the demands of new "religions" formed for the express purpose of gaming the system. Buy this book for no other reason than to read the lists of lunacy on page 157 - 161, and you have spent your money well.
