Isle church zoning case
could go to high court
A ruling by a federal judge this week has turned the question of whether a small Maui church can build on agricultural land from a local zoning matter to a constitutional issue potentially headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Samuel P. King on Monday rejected Maui County's motion to dismiss a U.S. Justice Department suit against the county on behalf of Hale O Kaula Church.
King upheld the constitutionality of a 2000 federal law that provides churches a fast track through municipal and state zoning code requirements.
He said the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) does not violate the U.S. Constitution. The law requires municipalities to show a compelling interest, such as public safety, to deny a religious group's zoning request.
"RLUIPA is not federal zoning of county land, it is federal enforcement of federal rights," said King, as he rejected county claims that the law violates the 10th Amendment prohibition of federal intrusion into state matters. He also rejected arguments that the law violates the First Amendment clause prohibiting government establishment of religion.
Maui County wants to immediately appeal King's decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals so the appellate court could consider it at the same time as they weigh a California judge's finding that the federal law is unconstitutional.
Both sides in the Maui case have said they would appeal a 9th Circuit ruling against them to the Supreme Court.
Maui Deputy Corporation Counsel Jane Lovell said the appeal on the constitutional matter would not halt the Maui church case, which is slated for trial before King on Feb. 18.
The 60-member Hale O Kaula claimed discrimination in its 2001 suit after the Maui Planning Commission refused its application for a special use permit to build a second-floor chapel on an existing building in rural Pukalani.
The Justice Department filed its own suit on behalf of the church in July 2003, indicating the interest of the Bush administration in enforcement of the federal law.
Early on, the Becket Fund for Religious Freedom, a Washington, D.C., law firm involved in about 30 similar cases across the country, joined Hale O Kaula's local attorney, Charles Hurd.
"It is now time for the county to deal with the requirements of the law rather than expend so much effort to scramble out from underneath them," Becket Fund spokesman Patrick Korten said last night.
Korten noted that the speed in which King ruled, two weeks after hearing arguments, shows that "it was abundantly clear in his mind that the act is constitutional."
Maui County got backup from the National League of Cities in the Dec. 12 hearing. Constitutional law expert Marci A. Hamilton, a professor at Cardozo School of Law in New York City, told King that the Justice Department suit is based on "an illegitimate law" that "disables zoning law to the benefit of religious entities."
The county needs King's permission to take the constitutionality issue to the appellate level while the trial is pending.
"The judge has said he doesn't really need RLUIPA to decide the church case against the county," said Lovell. "We think that would be wise because Lake Elsinore case has gone on to the 9th."
The Lake Elsinore, Calif., planning commission denied a church application for a permit to renovate a structure previously occupied by another religious group. On Dec. 17, California federal Judge Stephen Wilson granted a request for an appeal of his decision that RLUIPA is unconstitutional.
King said the 9th Circuit Court has already ruled on the question of whether the act violates the First Amendment "establishment clause" by impermissibly advancing religion.
The 9th Circuit and two other federal appellate courts upheld the act while a fourth court found it unconstitutional. All of those cases involved prisoners' exercise of their faith rather than land use issues.