BREAKING: Supreme Court votes 5-4 to deny San Diego church's request to reopen on its own terms for services this Sunday. Chief Justice Roberts joins the four liberal justices in rebuffing the church.
Here is CJ Roberts explaining his vote 
And arguing that the Court owes deference to states to respond to the "fact-intensive matter" of the pandemic
Justice Kavanaugh writes a dissent that is joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch.
Justice Alito dissents, too, but does not sign Kavanaugh's dissent or write his own.
Justice Alito dissents, too, but does not sign Kavanaugh's dissent or write his own.
From Justice Kavanaugh's dissent: San Diego's reopening parameters violate the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause
The dissent's closing paragraphs
Crux of Kavanaugh's dissent: California cannot impose limits on houses of worship that are stricter than limits on restaurants, businesses, supermarkets, factories and offices.
No mention of the relevant differences between these locales and churches: congregants attending services seem to be much riskier vectors of disease due to praying and singing aloud.
Here is the full order drive.google.com/file/d/1dZfrOr…
It's remarkable how poorly Kavanaugh's dissent responds to the reasoning in Roberts' opinion.
"Similar or more severe restrictions", R writes, "apply to comparable secular gatherings, including lectures, concerts, movie showings, spectator sports, and theatrical performances"...
"Similar or more severe restrictions", R writes, "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". But in "grocery stores, banks, and laundromats...people neither congregate in large groups nor remain in close proximity for extended periods."
Kav just insists CA is out to get churches.
Kav just insists CA is out to get churches.
The most alarming move in the dissent is to accuse California of targeting religion for the sake of targeting religion.
No acknowledgement that maybe California is making a reasonable judgment about the best way to protect its state from the spread of a virulent disease.
No acknowledgement that maybe California is making a reasonable judgment about the best way to protect its state from the spread of a virulent disease.
