Donald Trump doesn't always have the final say. When the real
estate mogul wanted a New Jersey redevelopment agency to take Vera
Coking's home by eminent domain to add a limousine parking lot to
his casino, the state superior court said no. That would be taking
private property for private gain, not public use.
Yet David doesn't always defeat Goliath in such matchups. And
there are some who worry that churches and the property of other
religious groups - which generate no tax revenue - could become
increasingly vulnerable parties to eminent domain seizures for
economic development purposes.
The US Supreme Court is preparing to hear arguments on eminent
domain next week in Kelo v. City of New London (Conn.).
"The exact issue before the court is, can you condemn property
solely to generate taxes and create jobs. If the court rules that
you can't, it will protect churches. Otherwise, churches will be in
grave danger," says Dana Berliner, attorney at the Institute for
Justice, the law firm representing property owners in the Kelo case.
In recent decades, synagogues, churches, temples, and mosques
have run into difficulty on zoning and land-use matters as
municipalities, with tightening budgets, grew more reluctant to
support tax-exempt uses within their boundaries. The problem became
so widespread that Congress passed a law in 2000 requiring munici-
palities to demonstrate a compelling reason for denying permits to
houses of worship.
Now some say the Supreme Court could open another path to
interfering with religious expression.
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents faith
groups in zoning and landuse cases, filed an amicus brief in the
Kelo case, arguing that such groups would be "singularly vulnerable
to being taken" by eminent domain if the court sides with the city.
"Any commercial use is likely to be preferred over a religious
use," says Jared Leland, legal counsel at the Becket Fund. "To be
able to practice your faith, you need a place to congregate and
Just ask the Rev. Fred Jenkins, pastor of St. Luke's Pentecostal
Church in North Hempstead, N.Y. While holding services in a rented
basement, his small congregation saved money for a church for more
than a decade. In 1997, St. Luke's bought a downtown property with a
partially built church they intended to complete. They sought a
building permit and parking variance, drew up construction plans,
and borrowed money to finish the project.
"Then they sprang the eminent domain law on us," the pastor says.
The local development agency condemned the property for retail
development. St. Luke's soon learned the property had been targeted
for redevelopment back in 1994, but no one told them as they went
through the purchase and planning process.
The church has been demolished and the property added to other
parcels that are part of a downtown renewal project involving
housing, a supermarket, and a bank. North Hempstead held the
groundbreaking. While others in the Long Island community are
delighted to get the boost for the neglected suburban area, St.
Luke's is struggling to survive.
"This has been devastating for our church. Some people have left
town and our membership has dropped off," says Mr. Jenkins. "We're
still renting the basement and also having to pay off the mortgage
for the church building."
The government offered the congregation $80,000 for the property,
$50,000 less than they paid for it. St. Luke's is litigating for a
fair value for the property. "We spent a lot of money getting
prepared for construction, and it was unfair not to have said
anything to us," Jenkins says.
The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution does allow governments
to take property for public use - traditionally roads, schools, and
parks. A half century ago, the use of eminent domain was expanded to
include condemning blighted areas for redevelopment purposes. …