Supreme Court May Hear Case over Living Room Minyan
The National Jewish Advocacy Center submitted the amicus brief in support of Daniel Grand, a resident of University Heights, who was issued a cease-and-desist order after holding small Shabbat gatherings known as a minyan, a quorum required for certain forms of Jewish communal prayer.
A legal advocacy group has filed a brief with the US Supreme Court urging it to hear the case of an Orthodox Jewish man in Ohio who was barred by his city from hosting prayer services in his home.
The National Jewish Advocacy Center submitted the amicus brief in support of Daniel Grand, a resident of University Heights, who was issued a cease-and-desist order after holding small Shabbat gatherings known as a minyan, a quorum required for certain forms of Jewish communal prayer.
Grand had begun hosting the services in 2021, inviting a small group of neighbors to his home. Under Orthodox Jewish practice, driving is prohibited on Shabbat, making travel to a synagogue difficult for some adherents. Grand expanded his home to accommodate the gatherings, which he said were necessary to fulfill religious obligations.
City officials argued that hosting such services violated local zoning laws governing single-family residential areas and prohibited the use of private homes as places of assembly for religious purposes.
The dispute escalated after a neighbor complaint, with local authorities warning that continued gatherings would be subject to enforcement. The city’s mayor also publicly encouraged residents to report suspected violations, and police increased patrols in the area.
Grand challenged the order in federal court, arguing it violated his rights under the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. However, the case was dismissed on procedural grounds, with courts ruling that he must first apply for and be denied a special-use permit before pursuing legal claims.
The newly filed brief argues that requiring such a process places an undue burden on religious practice and reflects a broader pattern in which zoning laws are used in ways that disproportionately affect Orthodox Jewish communities.
The advocacy group said the case raises significant constitutional questions about religious freedom and local regulation, and urged the Supreme Court to take it up for review.