RLUIPA.org
Hale O Kaula Church asks federal court to enter judgment against Maui
Hale O Kaula Church, which has been engaged in a long battle for the right to worship and add worship space to a building on its Maui upcountry property, this week asked U.S. District Judge Samuel King to rule that the county's denial of a special use permit constitutes a "substantial burden" on the free exercise of religion. The Motion for Partial Summary Judgement (PDF format, 512K), filed on September 29, states that "all of the relevant legal precedent," including a number of recent federal court cases around the country, supports such a conclusion.
The supporting Memorandum of Law, prepared by The Becket Fund and Honolulu attorney Charles Hurd, cites several very recent cases, including Westchester Day School v. Village of Mamaroneck (New York, opinion issued September 5) and Elsinore Christian Center v. City of Lake Elsinore (California, opinion issued June 24). "The cases tell us that a ‘substantial burden' on religious exercise occurs when government action puts pressure on an individual to modify his religious behavior, or prevents him from engaging in religious conduct, in a way that is greater than a mere inconvenience. . . . prohibiting Hale O Kaula from using its property as a church meets this standard."
Under Supreme Court case law and the provisions of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), a government can burden religious exercise only if it has a "compelling government interest," and only if it advances that interest by the "least restrictive means." The Hale O Kaula brief notes that "Courts have scrupulously followed the Supreme Court's instruction to classify only ‘paramount interests' of ‘the highest order' as worthy of burdening religious exercise." Neither of Maui's asserted interests, "preservation of agricultural land" and "fire safety," meet that high standard in this case.
"Agricultural preservation, though a legitimate state interest, does not remotely approach the level of a ‘compelling' interest," the church brief states. Maui has often issued special use permits to churches in agricultural zones, and the zoning rules expressly permit them as a special use. Moreover, the church "already employ[s] their land for agricultural purposes more than their neighbors," and would do so to an even greater degree if the SUP were granted. And not only has Maui "failed to produce any evidence" of a fire risk, but the county's own fire officials "found no fire protection issue that could justify the denial of a Special Use Permit."
A hearing on the church's motion will be held in federal court in Honolulu on December 12, 2003.