A federal judge in the Central District of California handed a win Monday to a Chinese- and Taiwanese-American church in Santa Ana that is represented by a pro bono team of lawyers from O’Melveny & Myers and Plano-based First Liberty Institute.
U.S. District Judge John W. Holcomb, in granting Anchor Stone Christian Church’s motion for a preliminary injunction against the city of Santa Ana, wrote the church was “likely to succeed on all three of its claims.”
Anchor Stone alleged the city of Santa Ana and its city council violated the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause as well as the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act’s Equal Terms and Substantial Burden provisions when it denied the church’s conditional use permit application.
Anchor Stone filed a lawsuit in February and a hearing on the preliminary injunction was held March 28, where U.S. Department of Justice attorneys appeared and argued in support of granting the preliminary injunction. The Department of Justice previously filed a statement of interest in the case supporting Anchor Stone.
“Judge Holcomb made it clear that the City of Santa Ana has severely burdened Anchor Stone’s ability to engage in religious exercise,” said Jeremy Dys, Senior Counsel for First Liberty Institute. “We applaud today’s ruling that requires the city to follow federal law and treat religious land uses the same as any other.”
Anchor Stone, a church that began in the homes of first-generation Chinese- and Taiwanese-Americans, had sought approval from the city before purchasing property for a church building to accommodate its growing congregation, according to its lawsuit. City officials responded positively to the detailed plans that church leaders shared, according to the suit.
Following a positive meeting in July 2022, the church purchased a property for the price of about $1.6 million and applied for a conditional use permit to use the property for a church, according to the lawsuit.
In denying Anchor Stone’s application, the city asserted its land use policy, called the General Plan, and prohibited “community assembly” on the property, according to the lawsuit. City officials had not mentioned the policy in its meetings with congregants prior to the purchase of land, the lawsuit says.
The term “community assembly” is not defined or used in the General Plan, the church contends, and the city’s claim is not supported because the applicable zoning ordinance allows for non-religious buildings such as museums, restaurants and daycare centers.
Anchor Stone tried appealing to three of the city’s governing bodies to no avail.
“During hearings in front of each of these bodies, City officials expressed indifference and open hostility to the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA); that federal law protects religious institutions from unduly burdensome local land use regulations and is binding on the City,” the lawsuit states.
One city council member, during one such meeting, said, “We keep seeing RLUIPA thrown at us as an excuse to circumvent our local laws …. I find it offensive because it asserts we are somehow opposed to religious freedom …. [E]very time i hear that thrown out there, that’s a smack in our face,” according to the lawsuit.
Such comments “fall far short of fulfilling the ‘First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion,’” the judge wrote, quoting from the landmark Supreme Court case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission after the shop’s owner refused to make a custom wedding cake for a gay couple, citing religious beliefs.
The comments also suggest that Anchor Stone would likely show the denial of the conditional use permit substantially burdened its religious exercise, the judge wrote in his 30-page decision.
Holcomb also noted the city’s reasons for denying Anchor Stone a permit “appear particularly arbitrary” given the city approved a permit for Compass Bible Church across the street.
“The City attempts to explain away the differences between its treatment of Anchor Stone and Compass Bible Church by contending that Compass Bible Church submitted its [permit] application before the General Plan was updated,” Holcomb wrote. “But it is unclear why that would make the City’s justifications for denying Anchor Stone’s CUP any less arbitrary.”
O’Melveny partner Timothy Durst said while the case will continue, the injunction “strikes a blow for religious liberty and free exercise.”
“The City’s zoning process — on its face and as applied to Anchor Stone — discriminates against houses of worship. The Court has now enjoined those practices,” Durst said. “It is a good day for the church. And it is a privilege for O’Melveny to represent Anchor Stone Christian Church and work with First Liberty.”
The case is Anchor Stone Christian Church v. City of Santa Ana and Santa Ana City Council, Case No. 8:25-cv-00215.
Anchor Stone is also represented by Josh Jilovec, Jace Breedlove, Nora Salem, Sarah Nelson, Mason Malpass and Grant Gibson of O’Melveny, and Ryan Gardner of First Liberty Institute.
The city is represented by Laura A. Rossini and Sandra M. Flores of the Santa Ana City Attorney’s Office.