RLUIPA and light pollution?

[Vance R. Koven]

I would suppose that preventing a service-affecting impediment to the Mt.
Palomar observatory could qualify as a compelling interest, as relocating an
astronomical observatory is hardly a trivial matter.

I also assume it matters whether the light-pollution ordinance qualify as a
land-use restriction for purposes of applying RLUIPA, no? As a
pollution-control regulation it might, although it affects the use of land,
not fall within RULIPA's ambit.

This thread puts me in mind of a recent to-do in Boston over a homeowner's
Christmas lighting display, which is so extensive that it has driven his
neighbors bats (and he's had it up since October). I've driven by the site,
and it is formidable indeed--it's like the floodlights at Fenway Park. I
don't know whether Boston has a light-pollution regulation (surely Boston
regulates everything), but could a non-church landowner claim the benefit of
RLUIPA were the city, or his neighbors, to try, shall we say, to douse his
lights?

On 12/11/06, Volokh, Eugene <VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu> wrote:
>
>      I sympathize with light pollution ordinances, and I'm not sure that
> they impose a substantial burden here.  But if there's a *compelling*
> government interest in preventing light pollution, then we really are in
> "strict in theory, feeble in fact" territory.
>
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu [mailto:
> religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *hamilton02 at aol.com
> *Sent:* Monday, December 11, 2006 8:42 AM
> *To:* religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> *Subject:* Re: RLUIPA and light pollution?
>
>  RLUIPA is not blanket protection from the operation of the law.  I would
> think that the federal laws at issue here would satisfy strict scrutiny.  I
> also have some questions regarding whether the intensity of the light bulb
> can be argued as a substantial burden on "religious exercise."  RLUIPA
> defines religious exercise to include any potential belief, not just central
> beliefs, but the light intensity argument seems to me to be a very tough one
> for the religious entities to win.  Moreover, where is the burden on
> reducing the wattage?  RLUIPA is unlikely to assist the religious entity
> here.
>
> Marci
>
> Marci A. Hamilton
> Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law
> Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
> Yeshiva University
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: stcynic at crystalauto.com
> To: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> Sent: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 12:34 AM
> Subject: RLUIPA and light pollution?
>
> Here's an interesting situation I'd like to get some opinions about.
>
>
> http://www.thedesertsun.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061209/NEWS01/612090325
>
>
> A church in Palm Desert, CA, has a giant lit cross that apparently
> violates the local light pollution ordinances (it's about 6 times brighter
> than the zoning laws allow). According to Phil Plait (
> http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/),
> an astronomer, it's causing problems for the Mt. Palomar space telescope,
> and apparently Federal law requires that all such lights within 45 miles of
> the observatory be shut off at night. A law professor from USC says that the
> RLUIPA prevents any enforcement of those statutes, but that strikes me as
> unlikely. Any thoughts?
>
> Ed Brayton
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu<Religionlaw%40lists.ucla.edu>
>
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted;
> people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly)
> forward the messages to others.
>  ------------------------------
> *Check out the new AOL*<http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fnewaol>.
> Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to
> millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
>


-- 
Vance R. Koven
Boston, MA USA
vrkoven at world.std.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20061211/c523863f/attachment.htm