Supreme Court to Review Kentucky Church’s Shrine Zoning Dispute

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Thursday to hear a petition from the Missionaries of St. John the Baptist, the nonprofit that owns Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Park Hills, Kentucky. The group seeks to build a French-inspired grotto and shrine to the Virgin Mary on a residential lot adjoining the church. A Kentucky appeals court had ruled that the Park Hills Board of Adjustment exceeded its authority in granting a conditional-use permit for the project, and the state Supreme Court upheld that ruling in a 6-1 decision issued in December. The petition argues that the denial violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), which bars government actions that impose a “substantial burden” on religious exercise.

Cincinnati EnquirerThe HillPBS News Hour

RLUIPA was enacted to protect religious institutions from discriminatory land-use regulations. Courts have issued conflicting rulings on what constitutes a “substantial burden,” prompting the petitioners to request clarification. First Liberty Institute, representing the church, notes that lower courts remain divided over the statute’s application to zoning disputes.

The Hill

Representatives of First Liberty emphasized the broader stakes for religious liberty. Kelly Shackelford, President and CEO of First Liberty, described the denial of the grotto as “outrageous,” adding that telling a church it cannot build a modest place for prayer on its own property is unacceptable.

The Hill

Neighbors across the street have objected, citing concerns that the 39-foot grotto would worsen traffic and parking in the residential area. Their opposition was a key factor in the state-court rulings.

Cincinnati Enquirer

• “Neighbors should not be permitted to wield local zoning laws as a heckler's veto to oppose the cherished traditions of churches,” — Ryan Gardner, senior counsel at First Liberty

Cincinnati Enquirer

• “Telling a church it can’t build a modest place for prayer and reflection on its own property is outrageous,” — Kelly Shackelford

The Hill

The Court’s term runs from October through late June, and oral arguments are expected later in the term. A decision is anticipated by the summer of next year, which could clarify the scope of RLUIPA’s protections in land-use contexts.

The Hill