The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of an Orthodox Jewish man in Ohio who was ordered by his city to stop hosting prayer services in his home.
As covered by The Jerusalem Post in April 2026, Daniel Grand, an Orthodox Jew living in University Heights, Ohio, invited a minyan, the quorum of 10 men that Jewish law requires for communal worship, to his home in January 2021.
Since Orthodox Jewish law forbids driving on Shabbat, Grand could not travel to a synagogue. The home minyan was his only way to fulfill this religious obligation, and he added a 700-square-foot recreation room to his home in order to host the gatherings.
However, one of Grand’s neighbors complained, and the city issued a cease-and-desist order prohibiting Grand from using his home for prayer. The city warned him that using his home for religious assembly violated local zoning laws.
Mayor Michael Dylan Brennan then publicly encouraged Grand’s neighbors to watch his home and report any sign of Jewish worship to the authorities.
A neighbor set up cameras pointed directly at Grand’s house, and the city’s police began driving by regularly.
Grand petitions Supreme Court after first challenge denied
In 2022, when Grand challenged the city’s cease-and-desist order and other discriminatory conduct under the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), the federal courts kicked out the case, ruling that a court cannot hear such a claim until the homeowner has applied for a special-use permit and been denied.
In February 2026, Grand petitioned the Supreme Court to hear his case.
The petition garnered the support of nine amicus briefs, including one from the National Jewish Advocacy Center, which argued:
“When cities treat a home minyan as a land-use violation rather than a constitutionally protected exercise of faith, they risk repeating a broader historical pattern in which Jewish religious practice is singled out under the guise of regulation.”
'Every single' gathering 'at risk'
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) then came on as co-counsel, alongside Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. Together. Then, at the end of June 2026, the court agreed to hear Grand v. University Heights, a religious freedom case, in the next term.
“This case matters beyond Daniel,” said ADF. “Home-based religious gatherings are a vital part of how millions of Americans worship: weekly Bible studies, prayer groups, Shabbat minyanim, and fellowship meetings.”
“If local governments can shut them down with a cease-and-desist order before anyone can challenge them in court, every single one of those gatherings is at risk.
“The outcome of Daniel’s case could have broad ramifications on whether government officials across the country can silence home prayer gatherings with a zoning law, harassment, and endless delays.”