Guru Nanak Sikh Society of Yuba City v. County of Sutter Casey Kroon Dennis Nelson Larry Munger Dan Silva

Good Law
456 F.3d 978·2006 WL 2129737·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 19297
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 1, 200603-17343California8,384 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bea, J.

We must decide whether a local government’s denial of a religious group’s application for a conditional use permit to construct a temple on a parcel of land zoned “agricultural” constituted a “substantial burden” under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000ce, et seq., and if we find that the denial was a substantial burden, whether RLUIPA is constitutional.

We find that the County imposed a substantial burden on Appellee Guru Nanak Sikh Society of Yuba City’s (“Guru Nanak’s”) religious exercise under RLUI-PA because the stated reasons and history behind the denial at issue, and a previous denial of Guru Nanak’s application to build a temple on a parcel of land zoned “residential,” to a significantly great extent lessened the possibility of Guru Nanak constructing a temple in the future. We also decide that the County did not assert, much less prove, compelling interests for its action; last, we find the relevant portion of RLUIPA is a permissible exercise of Congress’s remedial power under Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order that granted summary judgment for Guru Nanak,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.