456 F.3d 978 (2006)
The group was denied a conditional use permit to build a temple on a 1.89-acre parcel that was zoned residential. It then sought a permit to build a smaller temple on a 28.79-acre parcel that was zoned agricultural. It agreed to accept all of the county planning division's conditions on the land's use. Although the planning commission gave its approval, the county board of supervisors denied the group's application because the temple would contribute to "leapfrog development."
- In affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment to the group, the court held that the county's denial constituted a substantial burden under the RLUIPA because the stated reasons behind the denial and a previous denial of the application to build the temple on a parcel of land zoned residential, to a significantly great extent lessened the possibility of the group constructing a temple in the future.
- The court also held that the RLUIPA was a permissible exercise of Congress's remedial power under the Fourteenth Amendment because it targeted only regulations that were susceptible, and had been shown, to violate individuals' religious exercise.
The court affirmed the district court's decision.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.