This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
News

Constitutional Law,
Judges and Judiciary

Nov. 30, 2020

California churches get high court help in battle with Newsom

California churches that have fought against Gov. Gavin Newsom's orders banning or limiting attendance at religious services due to the COVID-19 virus got a major boost from the U.S. Supreme Court, which on Wednesday night struck down restrictions in New York.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in Washington on Nov. 16, 2019. (New York Times News Service)

California churches that have fought against Gov. Gavin Newsom's orders banning or limiting attendance at religious services due to the COVID-19 virus got a major boost from the U.S. Supreme Court, which on Wednesday night struck down restrictions in New York.

"It's a game-changer," said Charles S. LiMandri, a partner with Rancho Santa Fe-based LiMandri & Jonna LLP who represents several California churches challenging Newsom's restrictions.

In a telephone interview Friday, LiMandri said the Supreme Court ruling means Newsom's orders shutting down indoor services in areas designated as the most dangerous due to COVID-19 spread will not pass constitutional muster.

"That's just not going to stand," he said.

The Supreme Court, in an unsigned order, enjoined the state of New York from carrying out restrictions that limited attendance to 25 or as few as 10 people at churches and synagogues areas designated as dangerous due to the spread of the coronavirus.

"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 majority opinion stated. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, New York v. Cuomo, 20A87 (S. Ct, filed Nov. 25, 2020).

The 5-4 opinion, with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett in the majority, was a departure from two decisions earlier this year that upheld state public health restrictions.

The California church in that case, South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, filed a writ petition challenging Newsom's restrictions several months after it lost at the Supreme Court on a 5-4 vote, when Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg was alive.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett in Washington on Oct. 21. (New York Times News Service)

LiMandri's writ petition was filed Wednesday, a few hours before the court's ruling in the New York case.

The ruling is likely to affect a number of other challenges by churches to orders by the state and counties. Grace Community Church in Sun Valley is facing a contempt hearing in January over continuing to hold indoor services in defiance of a Los Angeles County order requiring that all services be held outdoors.

While New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo had reclassified areas where the churches and synagogues are located so they could hold services at 50% of capacity before the ruling, the court granted injunctive relief anyway "because the applicants remain under a constant threat that the area in question will be reclassified as red or orange."

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, in a concurring opinion, mocked New York restrictions that considered some businesses "essential" while imposing strict limits on church attendance.

"Bicycle repair shops, certain signage companies, accountants, lawyers, and insurance agents are all essential too," Gorsuch wrote. "So, at least according to the governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine, shop for a new bike, or spend the afternoon exploring your distal points and meridians. Who knew public health would so perfectly align with secular convenience?"

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., in a dissent, wrote there was no need for the court to act because Cuomo had reclassified the areas. But the per curiam opinion said the repeated reclassifications made it necessary to decide the issue now.

Justice Sonia M. Sotomayor said the Supreme Court should have followed its decisions in two other church cases and blasted the majority for ignoring public health experts during a pandemic.

"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 wrote.

#360583

Craig Anderson

Daily Journal Staff Writer
craig_anderson@dailyjournal.com

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com