Absent a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Feb. 6, 2020 denial of the plaintiffs' petition for rehearing en banc by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will bring to a close almost 13 years of litigation over the school zoning laws of the Village of Pomona. With the issuance of the court's mandate, the Second Circuit panel decision of Dec. 20, 2019, Congregation Rabbinical College of Tartikov v. Village of Pomona, 945 F.3d 83, is now final. That decision overturned the district court's finding that two Village zoning laws were enacted in 2001 and 2004 with the intent to discriminate against the Orthodox/Hasidic community, leaving those laws in effect.

Background

Congregation Rabbinical College of Tartikov purchased a 100-acre parcel in the Village from Yeshiva Spring Valley (YSV), another Jewish school, in 2004. Tartikov never filed an application to develop the property. However, in early 2007, the local paper published reports that Tartikov planned to develop a one of a kind rabbinical college with multi-family apartments to house up to 1,000 adult students and their families. This would have added up to 4,500 new residents in a Village of only 3,200 people. After a very contentious public hearing, and a local election in which the Tartikov plan featured prominently, the Village added two amendments to its zoning law imposing new restrictions on school dormitories and on construction near wetlands.

Tartikov filed suit in federal court claiming not only that the two 2007 laws, but also prior 2001 and 2004 zoning laws, were discriminatory. Tartikov brought federal constitutional claims under the Equal Protection and Free Exercise clauses, as well as asserting violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act (RLUIPA), and the Fair Housing Act. Tartikov also alleged violations of the New York State Constitution, and New York common law.

After a 10-day bench trial, the district court found all four Village Zoning laws were unconstitutional because they were enacted with the intent to discriminate on the basis of religion. Congregation Rabbinical College of Tartikov v. Village of Pomona, 280 F.Supp.3d 426 (S.D.N.Y. 2017). The district court also found in favor of Tartikov on its other claims, except for two provisions of RLUIPA. Following the decision, the district court entered an injunction, which exempted any future zoning applications by Tartikov from many of the normal state and local zoning and environmental requirements and imposed an expedited timetable for any future Tartikov application.

Second Circuit's Decision

The Second Circuit focused its opinion on the discrimination claims under Equal Protection, RLUIPA and the New York Constitution. It vacated the district court's rulings on Tartikov's remaining federal and state claims for lack of Article III standing. As Tartikov had never filed a zoning application for its rabbinical college, either prior to commencing suit, or during the litigation, the court held that any injuries from these claims were "merely conjectural." Therefore, the court found it lacked jurisdiction over them. 945 F.3d at 110.