Long Island Mosque Expansion Sparks Zoning Dispute

In Bethpage, Long Island, a small Islamic congregation has worshipped at a modest mosque since 1998. Now, with a growing community, Muslims on Long Island (MOLI) needs more room for prayer, education, and counseling. Their plan to expand hit a wall when the Town of Oyster Bay rejected their application, citing new zoning rules on parking. The decision sparked a lawsuit, with MOLI arguing the town’s regulations unfairly target religious groups.

The U.S. Department of Justice stepped in on April 11, 2025, filing a statement of interest in federal court to back MOLI’s claim. At issue is whether Oyster Bay’s zoning code violates a federal law designed to protect religious institutions from discriminatory land use rules. The case highlights a broader tension between local governance and the rights of faith communities to grow and thrive.

MOLI’s lawsuit points to Oyster Bay’s revised zoning code, which requires houses of worship to provide more parking spaces than secular venues like theaters or libraries. The group argues this disparity puts religious institutions at a disadvantage, limiting their ability to expand or even operate. The Justice Department agrees, asserting that the town’s rules appear to breach the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, a federal law passed in 2000 to shield religious groups from unequal treatment.

The law requires municipalities to treat religious assemblies at least as favorably as nonreligious ones. If a town hall can host hundreds with minimal parking, why can’t a mosque? That’s the question driving MOLI’s case. Yet Oyster Bay defends its regulations, arguing that parking standards protect public safety and manage traffic in residential areas. Both sides have valid concerns, but the court will decide where the balance lies.

This isn’t an isolated dispute. Across the U.S., religious groups have clashed with local governments over zoning laws that seem to favor secular interests. In Pennsylvania, a church won a similar case after being denied a variance to expand, with the Justice Department citing unfair restrictions. In California, Hindu temples have faced delays over permit approvals, raising questions about equitable treatment. These cases often involve minority faiths, which historically face steeper hurdles in navigating local bureaucracies.

Data from the Justice Department shows a steady rise in such conflicts. Between 2024 and early 2025, the agency launched over 155 investigations into potential violations of the federal law’s land use provisions, filing nearly 30 lawsuits. Courts have clarified that zoning rules don’t need to outright ban religious activity to be unlawful; they just need to impose significant obstacles. For communities like MOLI, these legal battles are about more than parking spaces; they’re about equal access to practice their faith.

Oyster Bay’s defenders argue that zoning laws exist to maintain order and protect neighborhoods. Parking requirements, they say, prevent congestion and ensure safety in areas not built for large gatherings. Residents near the proposed mosque expansion have voiced worries about traffic and noise, concerns that carry weight in any community. But federal law sets a high bar: any restriction on religious land use must serve a compelling public interest and be narrowly tailored to avoid undue harm.

On the flip side, MOLI’s congregation sees the town’s rules as a barrier to their growth and religious expression. The federal law’s protections stem from a history of zoning being used to exclude certain groups, from early 20th-century racial ordinances to subtler modern restrictions. While courts have struck down overt discrimination, like Baltimore’s 1910 segregation laws, today’s disputes often hinge on whether neutral-sounding rules have unequal effects.

The Oyster Bay case now awaits a federal court’s ruling, with MOLI seeking a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of the town’s parking rules. A decision could set a precedent for how municipalities balance community concerns with federal protections for religious groups. The Justice Department’s involvement signals that it sees this as more than a local squabble; it’s a test of whether zoning laws can unfairly limit faith communities without clear justification.

For the people of Bethpage, the outcome will shape not just a single mosque but the broader principle of fairness. As urban areas grow and diversify, these disputes are likely to persist, forcing towns and courts to grapple with how to honor both local needs and the right to worship freely. The resolution may not please everyone, but it will clarify where the line is drawn.