Supreme Court Cuomo Religious Decision

[squatz1]

Thought that the Supreme Courts latest case regarding New York Coronavirus restrictions was important for everyone to hear about:

In a 5-4 decision, decided by ACB (Trumps newest nominee), in a decision favorable to both the Catholic Church and Orthodox Jewish Synagogues. The case surrounds Governor Cuomos order relating to places of worship where he placed a 10 and 25 person occupancy limit. The court said that this violated the first amendment and the majority stated that there was no evidence saying that the applicants contributed to the spread of COVID and that less restrictive rules could have been adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services.

John Roberts, the Chief Justice, dissented and voted with the liberal members of the court.

https://www.axios.com/supreme-court-blocks-new-york-covid-restrictions-7d101314-0a06-48c2-ba62-c4fa2e8297bd.html

[BADecker]

Notice how careful the judge is to not go too far in freeing the people.

This case should be a good example for anyone who wants to take Cuomo down regarding his abuse of both, the US and the NY Constitutions. With tweaking, this case could be brought in favor of all business and people of NY, so that restrictions could be entirely lifted.

[Vishnu.Reang]

John Roberts, the Chief Justice, dissented and voted with the liberal members of the court.

I think by now we can safely consider John Roberts to be a liberal "torchbearer", in the league of Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and (late) Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And this is also one of the reasons why the conservatives needs to be thankful to Donald Trump. In just four years, he managed to place three conservative justices in the SCOTUS. None of the recent Republican presidents managed to do that. Let's not forget the fact that one of the most liberal judges in the history of the SCOTUS (David Souter) was appointed by a Republican president. John Roberts, although not a die-hard liberal like Souter was also appointed by a Republican president.

But the liberal media would tell Americans that they should support the RINO wing of the GOP (John McCain, Bush Sr., Bush Jr,  Romney.etc) rather than supporting true conservatives such as Trump. John McCain managed 173 electoral votes in POTUS 2008. Romney got 206 four years later. Trump outperformed both of them (in 2016, as well as in 2020) despite the media going ballistic against him.

[Gyfts]

Another 5-4 decision, and yet another day with Roberts dissenting with the liberals. Bush dropped the ball nominating him, but that's another discussion.

I would point to Neil Gorsuch's opinion which hits the nail on the head:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf

As almost everyone on the Court today recognizes, squaring the Governor’s edicts with our traditional First Amendment rules is no easy task. People may gather inside for extended periods in bus stations and airports, in laundromats and banks, in hardware stores and liquor shops. No apparent reason exists why people may not gather, subject to identical restrictions, in churches or synagogues, especially when religious institutions have made plain that theystand ready, able, and willing to follow all the safety precautions required of “essential” businesses and perhaps more besides. The only explanation for treating religious places differently seems to be a judgment that what happens there just isn’t as “essential” as what happens in secular spaces. Indeed, the Governor is remarkably frank about this: In his judgment laundry and liquor, travel and tools, are all “essential” while traditional religious exercisesare not. That is exactly the kind of discrimination the First Amendment forbids

Cuomo was unfairly targeting places of worship, especially within context of BLM rioters/protests which went on unchecked. Good on the conservatives and ACB on this decision.

[bryant.coleman]

Cuomo was unfairly targeting places of worship, especially within context of BLM rioters/protests which went on unchecked. Good on the conservatives and ACB on this decision.

If Cuomo want to apply law, then he should apply it equally everywhere. He is placing a 10 person occupancy limit for the places of worship, while his own party is encouraging rioters to march with their BLM protests where 1,000 or 2,000 people can be seen at once without any face-masks or other protective equipment. SCOTUS did the right thing by stepping in.

BTW I can understand John Roberts. He is nearing retirement and Biden is known to be very generous to those who fall in line.

[Gyfts]

Cuomo was unfairly targeting places of worship, especially within context of BLM rioters/protests which went on unchecked. Good on the conservatives and ACB on this decision.

If Cuomo want to apply law, then he should apply it equally everywhere. He is placing a 10 person occupancy limit for the places of worship, while his own party is encouraging rioters to march with their BLM protests where 1,000 or 2,000 people can be seen at once without any face-masks or other protective equipment. SCOTUS did the right thing by stepping in.

BTW I can understand John Roberts. He is nearing retirement and Biden is known to be very generous to those who fall in line.

I wouldn't even go that far with John Roberts. Seems like he's trying to take the court and go woke with it. His rulings are hardly consistent by any sort of constitutional philosophy with how much he jumps around with rulings. He ruled weird even prior to Biden.

[squatz1]

Cuomo was unfairly targeting places of worship, especially within context of BLM rioters/protests which went on unchecked. Good on the conservatives and ACB on this decision.

If Cuomo want to apply law, then he should apply it equally everywhere. He is placing a 10 person occupancy limit for the places of worship, while his own party is encouraging rioters to march with their BLM protests where 1,000 or 2,000 people can be seen at once without any face-masks or other protective equipment. SCOTUS did the right thing by stepping in.

BTW I can understand John Roberts. He is nearing retirement and Biden is known to be very generous to those who fall in line.

I wouldn't even go that far with John Roberts. Seems like he's trying to take the court and go woke with it. His rulings are hardly consistent by any sort of constitutional philosophy with how much he jumps around with rulings. He ruled weird even prior to Biden.

Little late on my response here, though I TOTALLY have to agree. Once he was starting to play kingmaker with his votes he begined to depart from any real conservative judicial philospohy. Not a fan of it, and I think Republicans can now look back on the John Roberts nomination and know that he wasn't what everyone thought he was going to be.

That's obviously the reason for people like ACB, Kavanuagh, and Gorseuch to be nominated. They haven't really departed from the conservative judicial philosophy that much. No one really wants to take that chance again and end up losing.