In 5-4 Split, US Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to California's COVID-19 Restrictions on Religious Services
"Similar or more severe restrictions apply to comparable secular gatherings, including lectures, concerts, movie showings, spectator sports, and theatrical performances, where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time." wrote Chief Justice John Roberts.
May 30, 2020 at 01:22 AM
3 minute read
A split U.S. Supreme Court Friday night upheld California's limits on attendance at houses of worship during the pandemic, rejecting a First Amendment challenge by a San Diego County church.
Chief Justice John Roberts, joining the more liberal bloc of the high court, wrote that the temporary attendance caps "appear consistent" with the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
"Similar or more severe restrictions apply to comparable secular gatherings, including lectures, concerts, movie showings, spectator sports, and theatrical performances, where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time." Roberts wrote.
State officials have broad latitude to protect the public's health and safety, and that authority generally "should not be subjected to second-guessing" by unelected federal judges, Roberts continued.
"That is especially true where, as here, a party seeks emergency relief in an interlocutory posture, while local officials are actively shaping their response to changing facts on the ground," Roberts wrote.
The South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista had asked the court for injunctive relief allowing it to hold unfettered services on May 31, Pentecost Sunday. A May 26 order by San Diego County health officials, based on guidance issued by Gov. Gavin Newsom's administration, limits attendance at places of worship to 25% of a building's capacity, or 100 attendees, whichever is lower, during the COVID-19 outbreak.
The church, represented by Charles LiMandri of the Rancho Sante Fe firm LiMandri & Jonna, argued that California placed no such capacity restrictions on manufacturing or warehouse facilities. LiMandri is working on the case with the Thomas More Society and the Dhillon Law Group.
"California's latest safety guidelines discriminate against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses," Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a dissent that was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.
The state could have told houses of worship to abide by social distancing and other health requirements and left congregations to decide how that should be done, Kavanaugh wrote.
"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," Kavanaugh wrote.
The state, represented by Attorney General Xavier Becerra's office, had argued that warehouses and office buildings typically don't house people singing or reading aloud in potentially close contact with one another for extended periods of time.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSanta Barbara Judge Accused of Moonlighting as Attorney for Secretary/Girlfriend
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The end of the 'Rust' criminal case against Alec Baldwin may unlock a civil lawsuit
- 2Solana Labs Co-Founder Allegedly Pocketed Ex-Wife’s ‘Millions of Dollars’ of Crypto Gains
- 3What We Heard From Litigation Leaders This Year
- 4What's Next For Johnson & Johnson's Talcum Powder Litigation?
- 5The Legal's Top 5 Pennsylvania Verdicts of 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250