The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling in favor of a municipality that its zoning
code did not unlawfully discriminate against religious institutions where it only permitted religious institutions as special uses in certain zoning districts. Word
Seed Church v. Village of Hazel Crest

A church was looking for a new permanent building for its 120-person congregation and wanted to buy property in a village. The
village’s zoning code did not allow churches as permitted, by-right uses in any
of its zoning districts, but some of the districts allowed churches as special
uses. The church sued the village on multiple grounds claiming that the zoning code discriminated against religious assembly and forced religious institutions to go through the more onerous special use permit process. 

The district court ruled in favor of the village, rejecting the church’s claims. First, the court held that RLUIPA (Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act) did not apply because the church never had a property interest in any real estate located in the village. Second, the court denied the church’s equal
protection claim because: (1) the church’s decision not to seek a special use permit precluded any possibility of
discrimination against it; (2) the church did not show that
comparable secular organizations had been treated worse
than churches; and (3) contrary to the church’s allegations,
there was no property in the village that could accommodate
the 120-member capacity the church said it needed. Finally, the district court rejected the church’s vagueness
challenge, noting that the Seventh Circuit has upheld zoning
ordinances with similar special use regulations. 

The church filed
a request with the district court for it to reconsider its ruling, arguing that the court had applied the wrong version of the zoning code in ruling against the church. In 2008, the village had amended its zoning code to remove numerous businesses from its
permitted and special use lists in the village’s business zoning districts. The district court denied the church’s request to reconsider, and the church appealed.

The Seventh Circuit ruled against the church for three
reasons. First, it found the district court would have ruled the same whether
it used the pre-2008 or post-2008 version of the zoning code so its argument on reconsideration was irrelevant.
Second, the 2008 zoning amendment removed secular businesses from the business
zoning districts’ list of permitted and special uses and had no bearing on religious
assembly. Third, the Seventh Circuit held that the church waived its right to challenge amendments to the
business district zoning district during the district court proceedings.

Post Authored by Daniel Lev, Ancel Glink