Photo: Jantanee Runpranomkorn/Shutterstock.com

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, weighing in on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that barred New York from enforcing coronavirus-related capacity limits on certain houses of worship, called the decision "irrelevant from any practical impact."

On a 5-4 vote, the majority sided with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and Agudath Israel of America, which both asked the court to stop enforcement of New York's restrictions as they seek an appellate review, according to the ruling.

The decision was a win for Randy Mastro of Gibson Dunn, who was lead counsel for the diocese, and Avi Schick of Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, who led a team representing Agudath Israel, the umbrella organization for Orthodox Judaism in North America.

New York Solicitor General Barbara Underwood defended the restriction order in the case before the high court.

The per curiam ruling comes as coronavirus cases continue to rise in New York and officials brace for a surge of post-Thanksgiving infections.

Cuomo, a third-term governor, said on Thursday the ruling is not a final legal decision and the issue will go back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The ruling also does not affect other mass gathering rules issued by New York state in an effort to curb the spread of the coronavirus, he said.

"So I think this was really just an opportunity for the court to express its philosophy and politics. [It] doesn't have any practical effect," Cuomo said about the ruling while talking to reporters on a Thursday phone call.

New York relies on a color-coded regulatory scheme to issue localized restrictions and target coronavirus clusters, along with areas of elevated cases. Religious institutions located in "red zones" are limited to 10 people or 25% of maximum occupancy, whichever figure is smaller.

Restrictions for "orange zones" are less strict and allow religious institutions to have the lesser of 25 people or 33% of maximum occupancy.

The Wednesday ruling marks perhaps the most significant legal blow to New York's coronavirus restrictions, which have faced a sprawling array of legal challenges but have overall been held up in court.

Capacity limits on religious institutions were rolled out as part of Cuomo's strategy for targeting coronavirus clusters on a localized basis, instead of issuing more sweeping restrictions.

According to an unsigned opinion from the Supreme Court, the restrictions should be subject to strict scrutiny and the gathering limits for the religious institutions likely violate the First Amendment.

"Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest, but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as 'narrowly tailored,'" according to the unsigned opinion. "They are far more restrictive than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court."

The limits on religious institutions are "far more severe" than required to stop the virus' spread, according to the unsigned opinion, and the restrictions are "much tighter" than those taken up in other parts of the U.S. hit hard by the virus.

"Even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten," the unsigned opinion reads. "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."

There are less restrictive regulations that could have been implemented to cut down on the chance of the virus' spread, according to the unsigned opinion. The ruling suggested the size of a synagogue or church should be tied to the maximum attendance for a religious service.

In separate opinions, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Democrat-appointed justices dissented. Roberts argued there was no need for injunctive relief because Cuomo changed the restrictions for the affected areas. As of now, the houses of worship in the applications are allowed to have up to half of their capacity, Roberts argued.

Roberts said the restrictions might violate the First Amendment, but it's not required that the court rule on that question now.

"The governor might reinstate the restrictions. But he also might not," he said in the opinion.

In a separate opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that she fears that approving applications like the one from the diocese "will only exacerbate the Nation's suffering."

"Justices of this court play a deadly game in second guessing the expert judgment of health officials about the environments in which a contagious virus, now infecting a million Americans each week, spreads most easily," she said in the opinion.

READ MORE:

2nd Circuit Weighs Whether Order Restricting Religious Gatherings Gets Strict Scrutiny

'Just Not Fair': Cardinal Dolan Addresses Brooklyn Catholic Churches' Lawsuit Against Cuomo's COVID-19 Order

Cuomo Order Limiting Religious Gatherings Applies to Catholic Churches, US Judge Rules