Religious Freedom or Public Safety? Examining the Legal Battle Over Dad’s Place Church

    In March 2023, Pastor David Avell of Dad's Place in Bryan, Ohio, entered into a legal battle with the city. Avell decided to keep his church open 24/7 due to overcrowding in local homeless shelters. In response to Avell’s decision, the city charged him with 18 zoning law violations related to his church's operations. These charges included “lacking proper kitchen and laundry facilities, having unsafe exits, and using improper ventilation” (Brown). Dad's Place was classified as a central business, which prohibited the building from allowing people to eat, launder, or sleep on the premises. Avell pleaded not guilty to the charges and filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against the city. In turn, the city dropped the charges in exchange for Avell halting operations and obtaining a permit. Eventually, Avell was jailed for not adhering to the building's fire codes, based on the fire inspector observing 15 people sleeping in a room without an automated sprinkler system.

    Avell claims this situation is an issue of religious freedom and asserts that he is being unjustly imprisoned. I aim to address the question: does this case revolve around religious liberty? I believe this is not a matter of religious freedom. While Avell is motivated by his faith to keep his church open 24/7 for the homeless to find shelter, that is not the core issue. The building is physically inadequate for the number of people staying there. Being on the streets in sub-zero temperatures is indeed far worse than being in a building that could potentially catch fire; however, that is not a standpoint the government is permitted to take. They maintain that safety codes exist for a reason: to protect the public. Even still, Avell claims that his religious freedoms are being restricted; however, though his actions stem from religious motivations, the city government is not attempting to restrict the free exercise of religion; they are merely striving to maintain public safety. Interestingly, this case resembles the issue with the Orthodox Jewish family from class. The family believes they have a religious obligation to have as many children as possible, but they have socioeconomic challenges and apply for a subsidized housing program, ultimately exceeding the family size limit to qualify for housing. They are then denied and claim it is discriminatory based on religion due to their faith requiring them to have as many children as possible. In that case, we understood that it was an incident regarding an indirect burden, which is "legislation that does not make unlawful the religious practice itself," making this not a matter of religious freedom but one of safety (Braunfeld v. Brown). This very same idea applies to Avell’s situation; the city's justice system isn't persecuting him for being a Christian man; they are addressing his refusal to uphold fire safety laws.

    In my opinion, the city has every right to shut down Dad’s Place church for building violations, and it is justified to jail Pastor Avell for not complying with the building's fire codes. I believe, that while Pator Avell’s actions were driven by a religious duty to help those in need, the legal battle surrounding the Dad’s Place church is fundamentally not a matter of religious freedom. Instead, this case revolves around issues of public safety and legal compliance. The city never attempted to restrict Avell’s free practice of religion, it only enforced its zoning laws and fire safety protocols to protect the well-being of the public including the homeless people within the church. Like the case of the Orthodox Jewish family, Avell’s situation evokes an indirect burden rather than an infringement on his religious liberty. Although I do acknowledge the fact that it is much safer for the homeless to be inside in sub-zero conditions, it is important to remember that housing that many people comes with rules and regulations. However, these rules and regulations don't encroach on anyone's right to practice religion. What do you think?