Why RLUIPA Should not be Amended to Regulate Eminent Domain Actions Against Religious Property
Limiting the Scope of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act: Why RLUIPA Should not be Amended to Regulate Eminent Domain Actions Against Religious Property
Cristina Finetti, 38 Seton Hall L. Rev. 667 (2008)
This Comment will argue that RLUIPA does not cover eminent domain actions and should not be amended to subject eminent domain actions against religious property to strict scrutiny review. Part II traces the changes in free exercise law which led to the passage of RLUIPA. Part III explains why the current version of RLUIPA does not cover eminent domain, through an examination of recent case law, the legislative history, and the fundamental conceptual distinctions between eminent domain and zoning and landmarking laws. Part IV explains that RLUIPA should not be amended to cover eminent domain because eminent domain is a generally applicable law ordinarily subject to rational basis review, and that religious institutions seeking to challenge a condemnation have alternative legal recourse under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This section also demonstrates that the application of RLUIPA to eminent domain actions against religious property may severely limit the government’s power to condemn, resulting in a disproportionate impact on private homes and businesses. Ultimately, this Comment will argue that RLUIPA cannot be expanded to the point that it erodes the vital government power of eminent domain.