RLUIPA.org
Virginia federal judge misread Constitution, precedent in RLUIPA decision
U.S. District Court Judge James C. Turk misread Supreme Court and Fourth Circuit precedent when he issued a decision finding the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act ("RLUIPA") unconstitutional, according to an amicus curiae brief (PDF format, 157K) filed with the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today.
The brief was prepared by The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, and was submitted to the appeals court on behalf of a diverse group of organizations including (in alphabetical order) the Aleph Institute, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress, the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, the Becket Fund, the Christian Legal Society, and People for the American Way. "Despite their vast religious and political diversity, the various amici share a common interest in assuring that [RLUIPA] is upheld as constitutional," the brief observes.
The Fourth Circuit is considering an appeal of Judge Turk's decision in Madison v. Riter , involving a Jewish inmate (Ira Madison) at Virginia's Buckingham Correctional Center who challenged the prison's refusal to provide him with a kosher diet as a violation of RLUIPA. Virginia prison officials challenged the constitutionality of RLUIPA, and Judge Turk ruled that it violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. He was the first federal judge to accept that view, while at least ten other federal courts, including the Ninth Circuit, have reached the opposite conclusion. Since Judge Turk's decision on January 23, 2003, only one other federal district court judge has ruled the law is unconstitutional (in Ghashiyah v. Wis. Dept. of Corrections ), and he drew heavily on Turk's decision. Ghashiyah is on appeal to the Seventh Circuit, and The Becket Fund represents the plaintiff.
"The core argument of both opinions [ Madison and Ghashiyah ] is that the Establishment Clause forbids legislative accommodations of religious exercise if they accommodate only religious exercise," the amicus brief points out. "But this argument is premised on a view of the Establishment Clause held by only one sitting Justice of the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the same argument has been rejected in every single reported case where it has been raised, not only against RLUIPA, but against RLUIPA's broader predecessor, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act." Judge Turk also "failed to cite even once" the Fourth Circuit's decision in Ehlers-Renzi v. Connelly School of the Holy Child , which is the controlling precedent. The text of the amicus brief (PDF format, 157K) can be found at www.becketfund.org and www.rluipa.com .