The key section from the dissent by Justice Kavanaugh:
The Church and its congregants simply want to be
treated equally to comparable secular businesses. California already trusts its residents and any number of businesses to adhere to proper social distancing and hygiene
practices. The State cannot “assume the worst when people
go to worship but assume the best when people go to work
or go about the rest of their daily lives in permitted social
settings.”
California has ample options that would allow it to combat the spread of COVID–19 without discriminating
against religion. The State could “insist that the congregants adhere to social-distancing and other health requirements and leave it at that—just as the Governor has done
for comparable secular activities.” Id., at 415. Or alternatively, the State could impose reasonable occupancy caps
across the board. But absent a compelling justification
(which the State has not offered), the State may not take a
looser approach with, say, supermarkets, restaurants, factories, and offices while imposing stricter requirements on
places of worship.
The State also has substantial room to draw lines, especially in an emergency. But as relevant here, the Constitution imposes one key restriction on that line-drawing: The
State may not discriminate against religion.
What’s alarming is that that 5 judges on the Supreme Court–a majority–failed to recognize this. There are 5 anti-constitutionalists on the court.
Since when do “factories, offices, supermarkets, restaurants, retail stores, pharmacies, shopping malls, pet grooming shops, bookstores, florists, hair salons, and cannabis dispensaries”–all of which are more privileged than churches in California today–enjoy special protection in the Bill of Rights?
PS: We know there are 5 anti-constitutionalists on the court in terms of the First Amendment and religious liberty. Is there any reason to assume the vote will be any different on the next Second Amendment case?
The key section from the dissent by Justice Kavanaugh:
What’s alarming is that that 5 judges on the Supreme Court–a majority–failed to recognize this. There are 5 anti-constitutionalists on the court.
Since when do “factories, offices, supermarkets, restaurants, retail stores, pharmacies, shopping malls, pet grooming shops, bookstores, florists, hair salons, and cannabis dispensaries”–all of which are more privileged than churches in California today–enjoy special protection in the Bill of Rights?
PS: We know there are 5 anti-constitutionalists on the court in terms of the First Amendment and religious liberty. Is there any reason to assume the vote will be any different on the next Second Amendment case?
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
The drones are overhead for your protection.
Nobody is tracking your every move, word and deed.
….and Chief Justice of The Supreme Court of The United States John Roberts is not compromised.