Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/19a1070_08l1.pdf
Page Number: 16.0

4 

CALVARY CHAPEL DAYTON VALLEY v. SISOLAK 

KAVANAUGH, J., dissenting 

accommodations, exemptions, or benefits that are not avail-
able to secular organizations.  The legislature might, for ex-
ample, grant religious organizations a property tax exemp-
tion that is not available to secular organizations.  Cf. Walz 
v. Tax Comm’n of City of New York, 397 U. S. 664 (1970).  
Or the legislature might authorize accommodations for cer-
tain religious individuals (but not secular individuals) that 
relieve them from the burdens of otherwise-applicable laws, 
such as the draft.  See Gillette v. United States, 401 U. S. 
437 (1971).  Those kinds of accommodations or exemptions 
can sometimes trigger Establishment Clause challenges be-
cause of the apparent favoritism of religion.  See generally 
American  Legion  v.  American  Humanist  Assn.,  588  U. S. 
___, ___ (2019) (KAVANAUGH, J., concurring); see also Cutter 
v. Wilkinson, 544 U. S. 709 (2005); Board of Ed. of Kiryas 
Joel  Village  School  Dist.  v.  Grumet,  512  U. S.  687,  722 
(1994) (Kennedy, J., concurring in judgment); Corporation 
of Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day 
Saints v. Amos, 483 U. S. 327 (1987). 
  Third are laws that apply to religious and secular organ-
izations alike without making any classification on the ba-
sis  of  religion.    For  example,  a  city  fire  code  may  require 
sprinklers in all buildings that can hold more than 100 peo-
ple.  A law like that would cover buildings owned by reli-
gious organizations and buildings owned by secular organ-
izations.    Those  kinds  of  laws  on  their  face  present  no 
impermissible discrimination or favoritism. 
  To be sure, those kinds of laws, although not differentiat-
ing  between  religious  and  secular  organizations,  can  still 
sometimes  impose  substantial  burdens  on  religious  exer-
cise.  If so, a religious organization may seek an exemption 
in court (if not also in the legislature) to the extent available 
under federal or state law and permissible under the Estab-
lishment Clause.  See, e.g., Our Lady of Guadalupe School 
v.  Morrissey-Berru,  ante,  p.  ___;  Gonzales  v.  O  Centro  Es-
pírita  Beneficente  União  do  Vegetal,  546  U. S. 418  (2006).