Landor v. Louisiana Dept of Corrections and Public Safety · ¶41

Finding our precedents under the Spending Clause unavailing, Mr. Landor and the dissent appeal to ones construing the Necessary and Proper Clause. In Sabri v. United States, 541 U. S. 600 (2004), we held that Congress’s criminal ban on theft, fraud, or bribery against a federal funding recipient, 18 U. S. C. §666, is a necessary and proper incident to Congress’s authority under the Spending Clause. See 541 U. S., at 605–606; see also Salinas v. United States, 522 U. S. 52, 60–61 (1997). Mr. Landor and the dissent contend this case is no different because personal liability for nonconsenting defendants is likewise a necessary and proper incident to RLUIPA’s policy protecting religious exercises. Brief for Petitioner 36–39; post, at 15–20.

slip opinion, revised 6/28/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.