Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: SCOTUS 5/4 for Jesus

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,812

    Default SCOTUS 5/4 for Jesus

    Happy Thanksgiving!

    Supreme Court Blocks Cuomo's NY Virus Limits on Religious Services



    US Supreme Court Blocks Cuomo's NY Coronavirus Limits on Houses of Worship

    Thursday, 26 November 2020 04:24 AM

    As coronavirus cases surge again nationwide the Supreme Court late Wednesday barred New York from enforcing certain limits on attendance at churches and synagogues in areas designated as hard hit by the virus.

    The justices split 5-4 with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett in the majority. It was the conservative’s first publicly discernible vote as a justice. The court’s three liberal justices and Chief Justice John Roberts dissented.

    The move was a shift for the court. Earlier this year, when Barrett’s liberal predecessor, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, was still on the court, the justices divided 5-4 to leave in place pandemic-related capacity restrictions affecting churches in California and Nevada.

    The court’s action Wednesday could push New York to reevaluate its restrictions on houses of worship in areas designated virus hot spots. But the impact of the court’s action is also muted because the Catholic and Orthodox Jewish groups that sued to challenge the restrictions are no longer subject to them.

    The Diocese of Brooklyn and Agudath Israel of America have churches and synagogues in areas of Brooklyn and Queens previously designated red and orange zones. In those red and orange zones, the state had capped attendance at houses of worship at 10 and 25 people, respectively. But the those particular areas are now designated as yellow zones with less restrictive rules neither group challenged.

    The justices acted on an emergency basis, temporarily barring New York from enforcing the restrictions against the groups while their lawsuits continue. In an unsigned opinion the court said the restrictions “single out houses of worship for especially harsh treatment.”

    “Members of this Court are not public health experts, and we should respect the judgment of those with special expertise and responsibility in this area. But even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten. The restrictions at issue here, by effectively barring many from attending religious services, strike at the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty,” the opinion said.

    The opinion noted that in red zones, while a synagogue or church cannot admit more than 10 people, businesses deemed “essential,” from grocery stores to pet shops, can remain open without capacity limits. And in orange zones, while synagogues and churches are capped at 25 people, “even non-essential businesses may decide for themselves how many persons to admit.”

    Roberts, in dissent, wrote that there was “simply no need” for the court's action. “None of the houses of worship identified in the applications is now subject to any fixed numerical restrictions,” he said, adding that New York's 10 and 25 person caps “do seem unduly restrictive."

    "The Governor might reinstate the restrictions. But he also might not. And it is a significant matter to override determinations made by public health officials concerning what is necessary for public safety in the midst of a deadly pandemic," he wrote.

    Roberts and four other justices wrote separately to explain their views. Barrett did not.

    The court’s action was a victory for the Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox Jewish synagogues that had sued to challenge state restrictions announced by Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Oct. 6.

    The Diocese of Brooklyn, which covers Brooklyn and Queens, argued houses of worship were being unfairly singled out by the governor’s executive order. The diocese argued it had previously operated safely by capping attendance at 25% of a building’s capacity and taking other measures. Parts of Brooklyn and Queens are now in yellow zones where attendance at houses of worship is capped at 50% of a building’s capacity, but the church is keeping attendance lower.

    “We are extremely grateful that the Supreme Court has acted so swiftly and decisively to protect one of our most fundamental constitutional rights — the free exercise of religion,” said Randy Mastro, an attorney for the diocese, in a statement.

    Avi Schick, an attorney for Agudath Israel of America, wrote in an email: “This is an historic victory. This landmark decision will ensure that religious practices and religious institutions will be protected from government edicts that do not treat religion with the respect demanded by the Constitution."

    Two lower courts had sided with New York in allowing the restrictions to remain in place. New York had argued that religious gatherings were being treated less restrictively than secular gatherings that carried the same infection risk, like concerts and theatrical performances. An email sent early Thursday by The Associated Press to the governor's office seeking comment was not immediately returned.

    There are currently several areas in New York designated orange zones but no red zones, according to a state website that tracks areas designated as hot spots.

    https://www.newsmax.com/headline/sup.../26/id/998874/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,812

    Default



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    1,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JABIII View Post

    Hard to argue with that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,356

    Default

    Boom. Plus 1 for the Constitution.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Blythewood
    Posts
    2,088

    Default

    Imagine that, common sense shining thru the China virus haze. Thanks DJT!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Branchville
    Posts
    5,860

    Default

    "The court’s three liberal justices and Chief Justice John Roberts dissented."

    It should have read:

    The court’s four liberal justices, which include, Chief Justice John Roberts dissented.
    The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is,
    as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

    Thomas Jefferson

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,356

    Default

    Roberts is a friggin disgrace.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,733

    Default

    A globalist appointee likes by both sides I was never sure why conservatives remotely liked him or Bush.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,812

    Default

    We used to believe that there was a difference in "sides". One just taxes us differently than the other, while they both waste as much of our money to enrich themselves as they possibly can.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,733

    Default

    True.

    Gun owners will internet "my cold dead hands" true believers will die or move to another continent for religious freedom.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Piedmont,NC
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whitty View Post
    Roberts is a friggin disgrace.
    He is useless. Reading the article, Roberts though if was fine how Gov's restricted religious institutions , like entertainment venues but liquor stores as "essentail business" . He could care about what the Constitution says.
    I liked what Gorsuch wrote, straight to the point.
    Hell stop closing or restricting business. Give them and us the information we need and Recomendations and let " We The People" decide how we patron and the business decide how to operate. It seams to be working well in South Dakota under the leadership of Gov Kristi Noem.
    All this has done is to let the lefty, communistic Dems, see how far the could push the population with compliance, and get away with ignoring and disrespecting the Constitution. Who would comply and be the sheep and who would rebel for their next experiment.
    A big social experiment to see how they have changed the education institution in brain washing the new generations.



    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Parole
    Posts
    5,092

    Default

    Anybody ever think Roberts is exactly what he was supposed to be? Roberts was on purpose.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,812

    Default

    We don't think it. We know it.

    It's why I am not too worried about Biden/Harris. The real power won't allow them to tilt the court too far. There is no money in it.

    Sure we will be taxed more, so you can either raise prices to compensate or lower them and sell more.

    As to all the rest, guns, environmental regulation, etc. As greedy and corrupt as they are? Buying influence/privilege won't be a bit of a problem to get what you want or need.

    The downside is the beating the infrastructure is going to take, but look at our roads and bridges after how many decades of "Republicans" in Columbia?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Mars Bluff, SC
    Posts
    13,643

    Default

    Roberts is more liberal than Ruth was.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    united states of america
    Posts
    21,587

    Default

    Roberts has swamp ass.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •