RLUIPA and light pollution?

[Volokh, Eugene]

	I'm not sure whether avoiding light pollution that would
materially undermine the observatory's work is a compelling interest; I
suspect it is, but that's hard to say.  But there just seems to be
little reason to think that allowing this exemption for this one cross
would indeed materially undermine the observatory's work.

	The interest in preventing annoyance to neighbors who might like
a natural-looking night sky is implicated even by this one cross.  But
it's hard for me to see this interest as "compelling."

	As to "all-or-nothing," and in particular Steve's argument that
this is a "time, place, or manner" restriction which should be subject
to lower scrutiny, I just don't see how RLUIPA's text would be
consistent with that.  If there is a substantial burden on religious
exercise, RLUIPA calls for strict scrutiny.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Steven Jamar
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 10:54 AM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: Re: RE: RLUIPA and light pollution?
> 
> Eugene,
> 
> Do you mean to say that avoiding light pollution for the 
> astronomical observatory is not compelling?  Or are you 
> saying that the law is not narrowly tailored enough or is not 
> the least restrictive alternative?
> 
> It seems to me that the interest is compelling and that the 
> inquiry would not be about that, but rather about least 
> restrictrive.  Or does one not even get to least restrictive 
> alternative if there is a compelling interest that does not 
> substantially burden?
> 
> I think one could argue that  there is a compelling interest 
> here, and that it does not substantially burdent the 
> exercise, and that one does not need to find a less 
> restrictive alternative under  these circumstances.
> 
> I also stand by my prior post that I don't think RLUIPA or 
> RFRAs should be interpretted in the Volokhian all-or-nothing manner.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> --
> Prof. Steven Jamar
> Howard University School of Law
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>