1. This case presents an important question that has divided the Circuit Courts about the scope of Congress' authority under the Spending Clause to impose liability for money damages on individual officials for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). In the decision below, the Eighth Circuit held that, although Congress clearly authorized such damages by the plain text of RLUIPA, doing so "exceeds its spending power" under the Spending Clause. Op. 9. As the Solicitor General has stated in a similar case before this Court, the Eighth Circuit's view is wrong; it adds to a split by several other Circuits that are in conflict with the Sixth Circuit; and this Court's review is warranted.

Whether Congress may impose liability for money damages against individual state officials acting under color of state law under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) pursuant to its Spending Clause authority