Mast v. Fillmore County

Swartzentruber Amish families in Minnesota say county septic and land-use rules pressure them to use modern technology in ways that conflict with their faith. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the Minnesota court for another look after Fulton v. Philadelphia, but it has not resolved the broader RLUIPA questions itself.

No oral argument on the current questions is scheduled. The Court previously vacated the Minnesota judgment and sent the case back for further consideration in light of Fulton v. Philadelphia.

“for further consideration in light of Fulton v. Philadelphia”

The case tests how strongly governments must justify refusing religious exemptions under RLUIPA, a federal religious-land-use law. That can affect families, churches, and other religious property owners seeking exceptions to health or environmental rules.

The next step is continued lower-court review applying Fulton and RLUIPA's strict test. There is no oral-argument date or decision window available now, so watch for new state-court action and any later return to the Supreme Court.

The Amish families say county septic and land-use rules force technology that violates their faith. The county says health and environmental protection justify the rules.

A stricter reading of RLUIPA could help religious landowners seek more exemptions from local rules. Counties might need stronger evidence to deny those requests.

Lower courts must reconsider the case in light of Fulton v. Philadelphia. If the dispute continues, it could return to the Supreme Court later.