Elsinore Christian Center is a non-denominational congregation in Lake Elsinore, California.  For twelve years they rented space for worship services in the downtown area, but the building simply became inadequate for their needs
.
So the church made an extensive search for other facilities that they could purchase for a permanent home.  After finding no other suitable place, they made an offer to buy the Elsinore Naval and Military School in April of 2000.

In order to occupy the building, the church had to file for a "Conditional Use Permit" from the City of Lake Elsinore, which they did in October of 2001.  The permit requested permission to renovate the facility and to use it as a church.  The property was zoned "neighborhood commercial".

The city's planning staff reviewed their application, then recommended approval by the Planning Commission conditional on the satisfaction of twenty-six separate items.  The church agreed to every one of the conditions.
When the Planning Commission met in February of 2001, they disregarded the recommendation of the city staff, and refused to issue the Conditional Use Permit.

The church then filed an appeal to the Lake Elsinore City Council, who refused to overturn the Planning Commission's decision.

This left the church with only one option.  In May of 2001, it filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging that the city had violated the First Amendment , the Fourteenth Amendment, and the RLUIPA (Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act) of 2000.

The First Amendment says that, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The Fourteenth Amendment says in part that "… No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. …".

In June of 2003, a U.S. District Judge denied the motion for a temporary injunction.  In support of the city's unexplained denial of the permit, the judge said that the church could not prove that they had suffered "irreparable harm".
In the same ruling, the judge said that the city had indeed violated the church's rights under the RLUIPA, but that did not matter because he was declaring the RLUIPA to be unconstitutional.

In his ruling, the judge said that "the landscape is not so pervaded by religious bigotry that this blunderbuss of a remedy can be described as 'congruent and proportional' to the perceived injury. Therefore, Section 2(a) of RLUIPA exceeds Congress's power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment." He further said that the church had "not alleged an effect on commerce."

Attorneys with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty (whose website I have used as a source for this article) filed a response to the judge's rulings. Their response stated that "Because the Church was denied a CUP (Conditional Use Permit), escrow was cancelled and the property was sold to a third party. The City has denied the Church a CUP on three occasions in both commercial and industrial zones. Such a pattern creates a reasonable expectation that the City will continue to unlawfully deny the Church in a way that makes it possible for the City to continue 'evading review."

The response further stated that "Land use laws, like all other laws, must be 'neutral' with respect to religion. This neutrality requirement cannot be squared with the City's laws, which disfavor churches and other religious assemblies by requiring them to obtain a CUP, but not secular assemblies such as health clubs, dance or music schools, restaurants and others."

The case has taken many legal twists and turns since then, but the bottom line is that though the church has been denied the opportunity to exercise their religion freely, the judge is allowing them to make an expensive challenge to his decision in higher courts.

What is the old saying about California?  Where California goes, the nation follows.  Let's hope it doesn't happen here, but churches should always be prepared to fight for their rights, because, once again, a judge has overruled a statute lawfully legislated by the People, and once again, zoning laws have become the weapon of choice.