Congressman Biggs Supports Critical Legal Case for Free Exercise of Religious Liberty

GILBERT, ARIZONA - Alongside dozens of colleagues from the U.S. House and Senate, Congressman Andy Biggs (AZ-05) joined an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court of the United States in Grand v. City of University Heights, supporting an individual's constitutional right to host a prayer meeting in his home and protections afforded under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA).

In 2021, Daniel Grand, an Orthodox Jew, sought to convene an informal prayer group at his home in University Heights, Ohio. After learning of the planned gatherings, city officials sent Grand a cease-and-desist letter prohibiting him from hosting the prayer group.

Grand initially sought a permit that would allow the group to meet in his home but withdrew his application after learning that obtaining the license would require his family to move out of the residence. Lower federal courts subsequently dismissed Grand's case because he did not complete the permitting process, prompting his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court has agreed to hear the case later this year.

"Religious liberty was one of the foundational principles our Founders sought to protect when establishing our constitutional system of government," said Congressman Biggs. "The First Amendment and subsequent federal laws have protected generations of Americans in the free exercise of their faith without government intrusion or interference. No local government should be permitted to undermine or eliminate that fundamental right. I am honored to stand with Daniel Grand in his fight to freely exercise his religion within his own home, just as our Founders intended."

As the Members of Congress write in their brief, "Congress designed RLUIPA to enhance-not restrict-religious freedom. Courts that impose an atextual finality requirement turn that design on its head. Their wait-and-see approach forces claimants to shoulder ongoing burdens on religious exercise while local zoning processes run their course. This Court should restore what those courts have taken away and hold that claimants may seek relief under RLUIPA as soon as government action substantially burdens their religious exercise."

Read the brief here.

###