## Facts

- River of Life Kingdom Ministries was a small Christian church meeting in rented, inadequate warehouse space and sought a permanent location.
- The church purchased a building in the Village of Hazel Crest located in a “Service Business District,” a commercial zone the Village intended to redevelop near a commuter rail station.
- The Village amended its zoning ordinance to exclude new noncommercial uses from the district to further commercial revitalization.
- The amendment barred churches and other noncommercial “assemblies” and institutions, including community centers, schools, libraries, and art galleries.
- After the amendment, a special use permit option that the church expected to pursue was no longer available for religious use in that district.
- The church sued under RLUIPA’s equal-terms provision and sought a preliminary injunction to occupy the building during litigation.
- The district court denied preliminary relief, and a Seventh Circuit panel affirmed; the Seventh Circuit reheard the appeal en banc to clarify the equal-terms standard.

## Issues

1. Whether the Village’s zoning ordinance treated a religious assembly “on less than equal terms” than a nonreligious assembly or institution in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc(b)(1).
2. What comparison framework governs RLUIPA equal-terms claims: a strict “any assembly” comparator rule or a comparator rule tied to accepted zoning criteria and the regulation’s purpose.
3. Whether River of Life showed a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits to justify a preliminary injunction.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit, sitting en banc, affirmed the denial of the preliminary injunction.
- The court held that the ordinance did not violate RLUIPA’s equal-terms provision because it did not treat religious assemblies worse than similarly situated secular assemblies when similarity is measured by the ordinance’s zoning criteria and objectives.
- The court adopted a regulatory-purpose/accepted-zoning-criteria approach, rejecting a literal rule that would require admitting religious assemblies anywhere any secular assembly is allowed.
- Applying that approach, the court found the ordinance drew a neutral commercial vs. noncommercial line and barred religious and secular noncommercial assemblies alike.
- Because River of Life’s chance of success was slim, and the Village had a substantial interest in preserving its redevelopment plan, preliminary relief was not warranted.

## Legal Principles

- RLUIPA’s equal-terms provision is violated only when a land-use regulation treats a religious assembly or institution less favorably than a secular assembly or institution that is similarly situated with respect to legitimate zoning criteria or the regulation’s stated purpose.
- “Equal terms” requires neutrality between religious and secular uses within the relevant zoning classification; it does not require municipalities to give religious uses preferred access to zones.
- A regulation that excludes all noncommercial assemblies from a commercial redevelopment district, including churches and comparable secular assemblies, does not create unequal treatment under § 2000cc(b)(1).
- In preliminary-injunction proceedings on an equal-terms claim, a weak likelihood of success on the comparator/purpose analysis supports denial of interim relief.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit held that Hazel Crest’s commercial-zoning amendment—excluding churches along with other noncommercial assemblies to advance commercial revitalization—did not treat religious assemblies on less than equal terms under RLUIPA, and it therefore affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction.


River of Life Kingdom Ministries v. Village of Hazel Crest, 611 F.3d 367 (7th Cir. 2010) (en banc)