Illinois Compiled Statutes
775 ILCS 35/20 (2026)
Judicial relief
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(775 ILCS 35/20)
Sec. 20.
Judicial relief.
If a person's exercise of religion has
been
burdened in violation of this Act, that person may assert that violation as a
claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and may obtain appropriate relief
against a government. A party who prevails in an action to enforce this Act
against a government is entitled to recover attorney's fees and costs
incurred
in maintaining the claim or defense.
(Source: P.A. 90-806, eff. 12-2-98.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2023 · leading case: Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Blagojevich, 901 N.E.2d 373 (Ill. 2008).
Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Blagojevich, 901 N.E.2d 373 (Ill. 2008). “Moreover, the Conscience Act and the Religious Freedom Act on which plaintiffs' claims are based expressly authorize plaintiffs *389 to seek judicial relief from the courts when their rights are burdened by government action.”
Vineyard Christian Fellowship of Evanston, Inc. v. City of Evanston, 250 F. Supp. 2d 961 (N.D. Ill. 2003). “§ 1988 , alleging that Evans-ton’s zoning laws on their face and as applied against Vineyard violate Sections 15 and 20 of the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“IRFRA”), 775 ILCS 35/15 and 775 ILCS 35/20 (Count I); the Equal Protection Clause (Count II), Free Exercise…”
Uptown People's Law Ctr. v. The Dep't of Corr., 2014 IL App (1st) 130161 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “3d 167, 168, 170-71 (2007) (acknowledging that Buckhannon’s interpretation of federal statutes was not binding in interpreting the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act (775 ILCS 35/20 (West 2004))); Mason v. City of Hoboken, 957 A.”
Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Blagojevich, 867 N.E.2d 1164 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “Section 20 allows a person to raise a claim in a judicial proceeding and seek appropriate relief if his or her "exercise of religion has been burdened in violation" of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”
The City of Elgin v. All Nations Worship Ctr., 868 N.E.2d 385 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “JUSTICE CALLUM delivered the opinion of the court: Defendant, All Nations Worship Center, appeals the circuit court’s order denying its petition for attorney fees pursuant to the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act (the Act) (775 ILCS 35/20 (West 2004)). Defendant…”
Mefford v. White, 770 N.E.2d 1251 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “” 775 ILCS 35/20 (West 1998). Since plaintiff failed to raise the Restoration Act in the agency and circuit court, the issue is forfeited on appeal.”
Marsaw v. Richards, 857 N.E.2d 794 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “” 775 ILCS 35/20 (West 2002). Defendants contend that the trial court falls under the definition of “government” and that the court’s order constitutes a governmental action that substantially burdened their ability to exercise their religion.”
Schneider v. The City of Chicago (N.D. Ill. 2023). “, and the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 775 ILCS 35/20 et seq. [1]. I dismissed the Healthcare Right of Conscience Act claim with prejudice and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim without prejudice.”
Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Blagojevich (Ill. 2008). “See 745 ILCS 70/12 (West 2006); 775 ILCS 35/20 (West 2006). Thus, this case clearly differs from all of the cited cases that have considered exhaustion.”
Mefford v. White (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “" 775 ILCS 35/20 (West 1998). Since plaintiff failed to raise the Restoration Act in the agency and circuit court, the issue is forfeited on appeal.”
Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Blagojevich (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “775 ILCS 35/20 (West 2004). Based on the purposes and protections of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, I would find plaintiffs have standing to pursue their claims.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
|