## Facts

- Massachusetts law barred liquor licenses for premises within 500 feet of a church or school unless the institution’s governing body gave written assent.
- In practice, an objection by the church or school within the radius operated as an effective veto of the license application.
- Grendel’s Den, a Cambridge restaurant, applied for a liquor license in 1977.
- Holy Cross Church, located about 10 feet away, filed a formal objection, stating in part that there were already too many liquor-licensed establishments in the area.
- The Cambridge License Commission denied the application based on the church’s objection, and the state alcohol control authority affirmed.
- Grendel’s Den challenged the statute in federal court; the district court and court of appeals held the statute unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.

## Issues

1. Whether a state may vest churches and schools with effective veto power over liquor licenses for nearby premises without violating the Establishment Clause.
2. Whether delegating standardless licensing authority to religious institutions has the primary effect of advancing religion or creates excessive church–state entanglement.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed and held the statute unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.
- The Court accepted that protecting churches and schools from disturbances associated with liquor outlets is a legitimate secular objective.
- The statute nevertheless failed constitutional scrutiny because it delegated discretionary governmental power to private entities, including churches, to control liquor licensing outcomes.
- The church’s veto authority was standardless and could be exercised for any reason, displacing public, evidence-based decisionmaking guided by governmental standards.
- The delegation enmeshed religious bodies in governmental processes and risked political division along religious lines.
- The dissent would have treated the scheme as a permissible accommodation and not an establishment of religion.

## Legal Principles

- The Establishment Clause forbids delegations of core governmental decisionmaking authority to religious institutions when that authority affects third parties’ civil or economic interests.
- A statute may have a valid secular purpose yet still violate the Establishment Clause if its primary effect advances religion by conferring governmental power on religious bodies.
- Standardless, unilateral veto power exercised by churches within a governmental licensing framework creates excessive entanglement by inserting religious institutions into political and regulatory decisionmaking.
- Neutral governmental tools (e.g., zoning rules or licensing standards administered by public officials) may pursue similar secular aims without conferring discretionary public power on religious institutions.

## Conclusion

The Court invalidated Massachusetts’ church-and-school veto over nearby liquor licenses because it transferred standardless governmental licensing authority to religious bodies, producing an unconstitutional effect and entanglement under the Establishment Clause even though the regulatory goal was secular.


Larkin v. Grendel’s Den, Inc., 459 U.S. 116 (1982)