(Papers to be published in Fordham Urban Law Journal)
Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), ruled that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment did not require states to grant religious accommodations with respect to "neutral laws of general applicability" even when those laws imposed a substantial burden on a person's religious practices. In 1997, City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997), held that Congress’s first attempt to overrule Smith legislatively was unconstitutional; and three years later, Congress enacted the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The Act covers land use decisions of states and local governments when those decisions involve programs that receive federal assistance or affect interstate commerce or when they implement procedures involving individualized assessments of property. When it applies, the Act prohibits the imposition of a "substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person" unless the burden is the "least restrictive means” of furthering "a compelling governmental interest." This panel will offer a diverse range of perspectives on the statute's impact on the ability of states and local governments to perform their important land use functions.
Business Meeting at Program Conclusion.