Religion Law Quiz #12

RLUIPA questions are always challenging because RLUIPA is relatively less known.  Let’s see how you do on this one.  Religion Law Quiz #8 pointed out that in City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507, 117 S.Ct. 2157, 138 L.Ed.2d 624 (1997) the Supreme Court ruled RFRA was in excess of the powers allotted to Congress under that provision.  Congress, of course, did not like that holding so it enacted the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA).  How did (a) Congress get around the holding in City of Boerne to make RLUIPA applicable to the States and (b) what did RLUIPA generally provide?

 

(Scroll down for the answer)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fortunately for all of us, the Supreme Court answered this question in Holt v. Hobbs, 574 U.S. 352, 357-58 (2015) wherein it stated:

 

Congress responded to City of Boerne by enacting RLUIPA, which applies to the States and their subdivisions and invokes congressional authority under the Spending and Commerce Clauses. See   § 2000cc–1(b). RLUIPA concerns two areas of government activity: Section 2 governs land-use regulation, § 2000cc; and Section 3—…governs religious exercise by institutionalized persons, § 2000cc–1. Section 3 mirrors RFRA and provides that “[n]o government shall impose a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person residing in or confined to an institution ... even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person—(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”     § 2000cc–1(a).

 

Disclaimer: The Religion Law Quizzes are provided as a service to you. They are intended only for educational purposes. Nothing in the Quizzes is intended to be legal advice and they should not be relied upon as conclusive on any issue discussed therein.