U.S. Supreme Court rules against Newsom on indoor church services in California COVID-19 case

[TexasTowelie]

In a ruling with major implications for California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s efforts to enforce COVID-19 stay-at-home orders, the U.S. Supreme Court late Friday knocked down the state’s prohibition on indoor church services.

The court ruled 6-3 in favor of South Bay United Pentecostal Church, located in the San Diego area, which has been fighting in court for months for the right to hold indoor services, saying Newsom’s order violated the Constitution’s protection of the free exercise of religion.

Under California’s tiered protocols, indoor church services are prohibited in regions of the state in the purple tier, where the coronavirus is designated as “widespread.”

The ruling was only a partial victory for the church. The court said in the unsigned opinion that the state could limit attendance to 25% of capacity. The state also can prohibit singing and chanting during services, as some health experts believe they could more easily spread the coronavirus.

Read more: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/coronavirus/article249056420.html#storylink=topdigest_latest

[Rhiannon12866]

1. It has nothing to do with "religion," people are getting sick and dying!

[Iliyah]

2. That is why it harder to contain this virus . . .

[3Hotdogs]

3. This, along with the peeps who refuse vaccine... Darwin, anyone?

I expect the result will be fewer Republican voters next election.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Go kill yourself or others.

[femmedem]

5. By saying some but not all restrictions are ok, they are acting like scientists, not judges.

By saying limiting attendance to 25% of capacity and prohibiting singing is constitutional, they are admitting that churches don't have an unlimited right to hold weekly superspreader events. That's good. But by saying which restrictions are acceptable and which cross the line, they are saying that they--not governors, not the CDC, not legislative bodies--have the expertise and authority to decide what level of risk is acceptable--not just for congregants but for everyone in the general public that those congregants come in contact with.

[intrepidity]

8. Agreed, and it is disturbing nt

[AllaN01Bear]

6. stupid , stupid ruling.

[stopbush]

7. Science v make believe. Make believe wins...again.