Church of the Holy Light of Thequeen v. Eric Holder, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

The United States appeals from the district court’s Amended Judgment. The government does not challenge the district court’s conclusion that an outright prohibition on the importation of Daime tea by the Church of the Holy Light of the Queen violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb to 2000bb-4. Instead, the government challenges only the scope of the district court’s injunction, which in part enjoins the government from enforcing certain regulations and corresponding statutory provisions set forth in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. §§ 801-904 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we vacate the injunction and remand.

While “[a] district court has considerable discretion in fashioning suitable relief and defining the terms of an injunction,” Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. McCain Foods, Ltd., 941 F.2d 970, 974 (9th Cir.1991), “[tjhere are limitations on this discretion; an injunction must be narrowly tailored to give only the relief to which plaintiffs are entitled,” Orantes-Hernandez v. Thornburgh, 919 F.2d 549, 558 (9th Cir.1990). “Injunctive relief ... must be tailored to remedy the specific harm alleged. An…