Land Use Approvals Were Denied Based On "Discriminatory Animus Toward the Hasidic Jewish Community"—Fair Housing Act—Equal Protection Clause—Trial Court Dismissed Claims as "Unripe and, In the Alternative, for Lack of Standing"—2nd Circuit Affirmed—"A Developer Bringing a Federal Claim Against a Municipality for Denying a Building Permit Must First Appeal an Adverse Planning‑Board Decision To a Zoning Board of Appeals" and "Submit at Least One Meaningful Application for a Variance"—Futility Argument Rejected—Planning Board's Expression of Doubt as to an Application Is Not Tantamount to a Denial—Mere Doubt Is "Insufficient To Establish Futility"—Requiring That Applicants Pursue a Meaningful Variance "Furthers Sound Policy In Light of the Oft-Stated Concern That Federal Courts Might Be Transformed Into the Grand Mufti of Local Zoning Boards"

A developer of a residential subdivision (project) appealed from a United States District Court decision which dismissed the developer's claims against a Village under 42 USC §1983 and the Fair Housing Act (FHA), 42 USC §12101 et seq.

The developer challenged the Village's denials of its building permit applications (applications) for five lots that the developer intended to use for the 181-unit Project. The developer alleged that the Village "was motivated by discriminatory animus toward the Hasidic Jewish community, to which (developer) intended to market the residential development, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause, U.S. Const. amend. XIV, §1, cl. 4, and the FHA."