Fifth Ave. Presbyterian Church v. City of New York

No. 02-7073 (2d Cir. June 12, 2002) ; Clearinghouse Number: 54828

Description

Second Circuit Affirms Order Enjoining New York City from Dispersing Homeless Persons Sleeping on Church Steps

Abstract

The Second Circuit has affirmed the district court’s order preliminarily enjoining the City of New York from dispersing homeless persons sleeping by invitation on plaintiff church’s landings and steps. For several years, homeless persons have chosen to sleep on the church’s outdoor property. In February 1999, the church officially designated two areas on its outdoor property upon which homeless persons are permitted to sleep at night. Persons taking advantage of the church’s invitation are given a list of rules, which includes instructions to clean up after themselves and a prohibition on begging, loud music, disruptive behavior, and foul language. In November 2001, the city notified the church that it would no longer permit the homeless to sleep on the church’s outdoor property. Thereafter, city police removed homeless persons from the church’s property during the night. The church brought suit against the city under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the First Amendment, the common law of trespass, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 200, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc et seq., and for deprivation of due process and violation of Article I, Section 3 of the New York State Constitution. The district court granted the church’s motion for a preliminary injunction, and the city appealed. The city argued that the district court erred in holding that the church’s outdoor sanctuary constitutes protected religious activity because allowing the homeless to sleep outdoors is an inadequate provision of shelter. The court of appeals held that the church had demonstrated a likelihood of success in establishing that its provision of outdoor sleeping space for the homeless effectuates a sincerely held religious belief and therefore is protected under the Free Exercise Clause. The court rejected the city’s argument that it is empowered to enforce minimum standards for habitability for privately run shelters in the absence of applicable regulations. Finding that the city had not sufficiently shown the existence of a relevant law or policy that would justify its actions, the court affirmed the order enjoining the city from dispersing homeless individuals sleeping on church property.

Additional Information

Attorney Information
Docket Date
2002-06-12 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: