Housing and Civil Enforcement Cases

On May 20, 2025, the United States filed a complaint in United States v. City of Troy, Idaho (D. Idaho), alleging that the City of Troy, Idaho, violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) when it denied a conditional use permit (CUP) application sought by Christ Church, a small evangelical church.  The lawsuit alleges that Christ Church had outgrown the space where it had been worshipping and was unable to find a space to rent. It then sought a CUP to operate a church in the City’s C-1 zoning district, where nonreligious assembly uses such as clubs, museums, auditoriums, and art galleries were allowed. Local residents vociferously opposed the Church’s CUP application, and many of their written and verbal comments reflected animus against Christ Church’s beliefs.  In its denial of the Church’s CUP application, the City cited the fact that the public was “heavily against” it and that the “great majority of the city residents” opposed granting the CUP. The lawsuit alleges that the City’s denial of the CUP imposed a substantial burden on Christ Church and was based on the community’s discriminatory animus against the Church. It also alleges that the City’s zoning code treats religious assembly use worse than nonreligious assembly use.  The lawsuit alleges violations of RLUIPA’s substantial burden, equal terms, and discrimination provisions

Press Release 

On April 29, 2025, the Justice Department filed a statement of interest in Grace New England v. Town of Weare (D.N.H.), a private lawsuit alleging that the Town violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) by threating fines against a small home-based church and its pastor. The fines were allegedly an attempt to force the church to undergo the Town’s site plan review process even though New Hampshire state law prohibits local governments from requiring this process for religious land use. The Town filed a motion for summary judgment, contending in part that the plaintiffs’ claims are not ready to be heard by the court because the plaintiffs have not gone through the full site review process and have not exhausted potential administrative appeals. The department’s statement of interest refutes these contentions, explaining that the plaintiffs’ claims are ripe due to the nature of the RLUIPA claims and the Town’s cease-and-desist order. The statement of interest also explains that RLUIPA does not require a plaintiff to pursue every possible administrative appeal before filing a lawsuit

On April 11, 2025, the Justice Department filed a statement of interest in Muslims on Long Islands v. Township of Oyster Bay (E.D.N.Y.), a lawsuit alleging that the Town violated RLUIPA by enacting and enforcing parking provisions that treat religious uses less favorably than secular places of assembly.  The lawsuit alleges that Muslims on Long Island (MOLI) has worshipped at a mosque in Bethpage, Long Island, since 1998, but that it has grown and now needs additional space for prayer, religious education, ritual washing and religious counseling. In its complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction, MOLI claims that the Town’s recently revised zoning code imposes more onerous parking requirements on houses of worship than on comparable nonreligious places of assembly like theaters, museums and libraries.  MOLI alleges that the Town denied its application to expand its house of worship, relying on the Town’s recently revised parking code.  The Department’s statement of interest supports MOLI’s argument that the zoning code treats religious uses less favorably than non-religious uses, in violation of RLUIPA’s equal terms provision, and that the Town has failed to justify this unequal treatment.

Press Release 4/11/2025

On March 14, 2025, the Justice Department filed a statement of interest in Anchor Stone Christian Church v. City of Santa Ana, No. 8:25-cv-215, a lawsuit alleging that the City violated RLUIPA by enacting and enforcing zoning provisions that treat religious uses less favorably than secular places of assembly.  The lawsuit alleges that the City’s professional district allows, as of right, nonreligious assembly uses like museums and art galleries, but only allows religious assembly uses with the City’s discretionary approval of a conditional use permit (CUP).  The lawsuit alleges that Anchor Stone is a small Christian church of first-generation Chinese and Taiwanese Americans.  It obtained space within the City’s professional district and applied for a CUP to operate a Church but was denied by the City.  The Church filed a motion for preliminary injunction, seeking an order allowing it to worship at its property.  The Department’s statement of interest supports the Church’s argument that the zoning code, on its face, treats religious uses less favorably than nonreligious assembly uses, in violation of RLUIPA’s equal terms provision, and that the City has failed to justify this unequal treatment.

Press Release (3/17/2025)

On March 3, 2025, the Justice Department filed a statement of interest in Hope Rising Community Church v. Borough of Clarion, No. 2:24-cv-01504 (W.D. Pa.), a lawsuit alleging that the Borough violated RLUIPA by enacting and enforcing zoning provisions that treat religious uses less favorably than similar secular assemblies.  The lawsuit alleges that the Church has outgrown its current facility and that the only suitable property in the Borough is located in the Borough’s C-2 Commercial District.  This District does not allow houses of worship, but permits nonreligious assembly uses like theaters and civic/cultural buildings.  When the Church approached the Borough about using the property for religious purposes, Borough officials allegedly told the Church that the Borough would not grant zoning approval and that the Borough did not “need any more Churches.”  The Borough filed a motion to dismiss the Church’s lawsuit, arguing in part that the Church had failed to properly allege an equal terms claim under RLUIPA and that the Church was not sufficiently injured by the Borough’s conduct to assert such a claim.  The statement of interest refutes these contentions, explaining that the Church has properly alleged an equal terms claim and that the Church, which cannot develop its proposed religious facility, has suffered a concrete injury.   

Press Release (3/3/2025)

On March 18, 2025, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Sugar Grove Township, Pennsylvania, et al. (W.D. Pa.). The complaint, which was filed on January 30, 2025, alleges that Sugar Grove Township, PA (“Township”), and the Sugar Grove Area Sewage Authority (“SUGASA”) violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) by enacting and enforcing two ordinances against Old Order Amish residents: one mandating that certain households connect to the Township’s and SUGASA’s municipal sewage system, which requires the use of an electric grinder pump, and one banning privies on property intended for permanent residence.  The lawsuit alleges that these acts substantially burdened Old Order Amish residents’ religious exercise, which restricts the use of electricity and requires adherents to remain separate and apart from the modern world.  The consent order requires the Township and SUGASA to exempt certain Old Order Amish households from mandatory connection to the municipal sewage system, permit Old Order Amish residents to use privies on their properties, and forgive any outstanding liens, fines, or other monetary penalties against Old Order Amish households for prior noncompliance with the two ordinances. Among other things, the consent order also requires the Township and SUGASA to train their officials and employees on RLUIPA’s provisions, establish a procedure for receiving and resolving RLUIPA complaints, and provide reports to the United States.

Press Release (1/30/2025)

On January 18, 2025, the Division filed an Equal Credit Opportunity Act complaint and proposed consent order to resolve its allegations in United States v. SouthEast Bank (E.D. Tenn.). The complaint alleges that SouthEast Bank implemented school-related eligibility criteria for an online, national student loan refinance product that discriminated against Black and American Indian/Alaska Native applicants. The complaint also alleges that SouthEast failed to properly notify applicants who were denied loans based on the eligibility criteria, as required by ECOA. Among other relief, the proposed consent order would provide $1.5 million in monetary relief to benefit all individuals from schools previously barred under the eligibility criteria. This matter was referred to the Department by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

On January 17, 2025, the United States filed a complaint in United States v. Rockland County & Village of Spring Valley (S.D.N.Y.). The complaint alleges that the defendants—Rockland County and the Village of Spring Valley—breached a March 23, 2018, Voluntary Compliance Agreement (VCA) with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The VCA resolved administrative complaints filed with HUD that alleged a private developer—a subrecipient of HUD grant funding—designed and marketed affordable housing units specifically for use by White Hasidic Jewish homebuyers and excluded prospective Black homebuyers. The VCA and a 2021 amendment required the defendants to develop additional affordable housing units and ensure they are marketed to the entire community. The complaint alleges that the defendants breached the agreement because they have not completed the required units. The case was referred to the Division for enforcement by HUD after notifying the defendants of the breach and giving them an opportunity to respond.

On January 17, 2025, the United States filed a pattern or practice complaint in United States v. Kurt Williams and Gearhead Properties, LC. (S.D. Iowa).  The complaint alleges that the defendants – the manager and owner of multiple rental dwellings in the Davenport, Iowa area - discriminated on the basis of sex in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA).  Specifically, the complaint alleges that, since at least 2010, Defendant Kurt Williams engaged in severe, pervasive, and unwelcome sexual harassment of female tenants on multiple occasions by, among other things, making unwelcome sexual comments and unwelcome sexual advances; sending unwanted sexual text messages, requests for photos, and exposing his genitals; offering housing-related benefits in exchange for sex or sex acts; and taking adverse housing actions against female tenants who objected to and/or refused his sexual advances.

Press Release (1/17/2025)

On February 5, 2025, the court entered a consent order in United States v. AWH Orlando Property, LLC, d/b/a DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Orlando at SeaWorld (M.D. Fla.).  The complaint, which was filed on January 16, 2025, alleged that the DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Orlando at SeaWorld (the “DoubleTree”) adopted and implemented a discriminatory policy against hosting guests of Arab descent, in violation of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by unilaterally canceling a conference that was to be held by the Arab America Foundation, a non-profit educational and cultural organization. The consent order requires the defendant to issue a statement to the Arab America Foundation that all guests are welcome at the DoubleTree, establish a written anti-discrimination policy, notify employees of their obligations under the consent decree and defendant’s commitment to ensuring equal access to the DoubleTree, provide training on Title II, conduct outreach to Arab American groups, and make regular reports to the department to demonstrate its compliance with the consent decree.

Press Release (1/16/2025)

On January 16, 2025, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York filed a Fair Housing Act pattern or practice/denial of rights complaint in United States v. Lettire Constr. Corp. (S.D.N.Y.), alleging that Lettire Construction, a developer of residential rental apartment buildings in New York City, and others designed and constructed The Tapestry, a 185-unit building in Manhattan, Chestnut Commons, a 275-unit building in Brooklyn, and Atrium at Sumner, a 190-unit building in Brooklyn, without required accessible features.  Also on January 16, the USAO submitted to the court a proposed consent decree resolving the United States’ claims against Defendants Lettire Construction, Lettire 124th Street LLC, UBC Chestnut Commons LLC, and UBC Sumner LLC. Under the settlement, Lettire Construction will make the necessary retrofits at the Atrium and pay a civil penalty of $20,000, and the other three defendants will each pay a civil penalty of $10,000.  On January 17, the USAO submitted to the court a proposed consent decree resolving the United States’ claims against Defendant East 124th Street LLC.  Under the settlement, this defendant will make the necessary retrofits at the Tapesty, pay a civil penalty of $10,000, and pay compensatory damages of $20,000 to individuals who were harmed by the inaccessible conditions at the Tapestry.

Press Release (1/17/2025)

On January 15, 2025, the United States filed an “election” complaint in United States v. Payseur (D.N.J.). The complaint alleges that the defendants—Juliet Payseur and 20-22 McGregor Avenue, LLC—discriminated against a Black tenant based on race in violation of the Fair Housing Act. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the landlord demanded higher rent and other less favorable lease terms from the tenant than a similarly situated White tenant. The complaint also alleges that the landlord retaliated against the tenant after she reported this discrimination. The case was referred to the Division after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.