Supreme Court rejects challenge to keep from limiting church services

[internet troll]

I am posting this in the general firearms section because it makes me think twice if I really want any 2nd amendment cases going to the Supreme Court. No idea where Roberts will fall these days. It is also a reason why the presidency is once again so important this year. If Trump gets to replace Ginsberg there is a good chance his choice will solidify the court towards the 2nd.



https://www.foxnews.com/us/supreme-c...-with-liberals

Supreme Court rejects challenge to limits on church services; Roberts sides with liberals
4 hours ago
California bishop takes legal action against Gov. Newsom's restrictions on in-person worship

Bishop Arthur Hodges, South Bay United Pentecostal pastor, joins Martha MacCallum on 'The Story.'

WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court on Friday rejected an emergency appeal by a California church that challenged state limits on attendance at worship services that have been imposed to contain the spread of the coronavirus.

Over the dissent of the four more conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court's four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, California, in the San Diego area.

CALIFORNIA ANNOUNCES CHURCHES, HOUSES OF WORSHIP CAN REOPEN UNDER CERTAIN GUIDELINES AMID CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK

The church argued that limits on how many people can attend their services violate constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and had been seeking an order in time for services on Sunday. The church said it has crowds of 200 to 300 people for its services.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined the Supreme Court's four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, Calif., in the San Diego area.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined the Supreme Court's four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, Calif., in the San Diego area.
Roberts wrote in brief opinion that the restriction allowing churches to reopen at 25% of their capacity, with no more than 100 worshipers at a time, “appear consistent" with the First Amendment. Roberts said similar or more severe limits apply to concerts, movies and sporting events “where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in dissent that the restriction “discriminates against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses. Such discrimination violates the First Amendment.” Kavanaugh pointed to supermarkets, restaurants, hair salons, cannabis dispensaries and other businesses that are not subject to the same restrictions.

CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE CORONAVIRUS COVERAGE

Lower courts in California had previously turned down the churches' requests.

The court also rejected an appeal from two churches in the Chicago area that objected to Gov. Jay Pritzker’s limit of 10 worshipers at religious services. Before the court acted, Pritzker modified the restrictions to allow for up to 100 people at a time. There were no recorded dissents.

[icp4life162005]

I am posting this in the general firearms section because it makes me think twice if I really want any 2nd amendment cases going to the Supreme Court. No idea where Roberts will fall these days. It is also a reason why the presidency is once again so important this year. If Trump gets to replace Ginsberg there is a good chance his choice will solidify the court towards the 2nd.



https://www.foxnews.com/us/supreme-c...-with-liberals

Supreme Court rejects challenge to limits on church services; Roberts sides with liberals
4 hours ago
California bishop takes legal action against Gov. Newsom's restrictions on in-person worship

Bishop Arthur Hodges, South Bay United Pentecostal pastor, joins Martha MacCallum on 'The Story.'

WASHINGTON * A divided Supreme Court on Friday rejected an emergency appeal by a California church that challenged state limits on attendance at worship services that have been imposed to contain the spread of the coronavirus.

Over the dissent of the four more conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court's four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, California, in the San Diego area.

CALIFORNIA ANNOUNCES CHURCHES, HOUSES OF WORSHIP CAN REOPEN UNDER CERTAIN GUIDELINES AMID CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK

The church argued that limits on how many people can attend their services violate constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and had been seeking an order in time for services on Sunday. The church said it has crowds of 200 to 300 people for its services.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined the Supreme Court's four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, Calif., in the San Diego area.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined the Supreme Court's four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, Calif., in the San Diego area.
Roberts wrote in brief opinion that the restriction allowing churches to reopen at 25% of their capacity, with no more than 100 worshipers at a time, *appear consistent" with the First Amendment. Roberts said similar or more severe limits apply to concerts, movies and sporting events *where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time.*

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in dissent that the restriction *discriminates against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses. Such discrimination violates the First Amendment.* Kavanaugh pointed to supermarkets, restaurants, hair salons, cannabis dispensaries and other businesses that are not subject to the same restrictions.

CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE CORONAVIRUS COVERAGE

Lower courts in California had previously turned down the churches' requests.

The court also rejected an appeal from two churches in the Chicago area that objected to Gov. Jay Pritzker*s limit of 10 worshipers at religious services. Before the court acted, Pritzker modified the restrictions to allow for up to 100 people at a time. There were no recorded dissents.

Bill of rights is out the window on fire.

[tlnzz1]

The Bill of Rights is being turned into the Bill of Suggestions .

[Bang]

Is being? As in currently? Violations of our 2nd amendment rights are documented and dated since 1920s with NY Sullivan Act, 1934 NFA, years of LTCF requirements, AWBs.

How the hell an oligarchy of 9 people given the power to run the country was ever considered a balancing element escapes me.

[Pilot321]

Roberts once again shows his disdain for the Constitution. Effing traitor. Government does NOT grant rights!

[littlefitz]

Thanks George W.
And he's only 65 years old too.

[Royinmontco]

While everybody is complaining about Roberts, how can we not forget the other 4? How can any judge, at that level, mistake freedom of assembly and freedom of religion anything other than core values of the United States of America? This is the scariest thing I've witnessed to come out of this "pandemic". I am beginning to put some real thought into the tinfoil hatters that have been calling this a scam from the start.

[JenniferG]

While everybody is complaining about Roberts, how can we not forget the other 4? How can any judge, at that level, mistake freedom of assembly and freedom of religion anything other than core values of the United States of America? This is the scariest thing I've witnessed to come out of this "pandemic". I am beginning to put some real thought into the tinfoil hatters that have been calling this a scam from the start.

Its hard to be honest with yourself and think things are happening for a reason and not just a coincidence. You have to override the illogical normalcy bias that humans possess.

[God's Country]

Thanks George W.
And he's only 65 years old too.

yup another RINO appointed liberal pansy.

[Square Bag]

Enter Chief Justice Roberts for the win! Compromised f*er