Fed. judge enjoins New York Gov. Cuomo and NYC Mayor de Blasio's COVID-19 orders restricting indoor religious activities to a greater degree than non-religious business activities. drive.google.com/file/d/1y5Xb0T… 
Fed. judge also enjoins Cuomo and de Blasio from enforcing any limitation for outdoor gatherings so long as participants in such gatherings follow social distancing requirements.
The basis of this part of the ruling was the favoritism Cuomo and de Blasio gave to BLM protesters.
The basis of this part of the ruling was the favoritism Cuomo and de Blasio gave to BLM protesters.
This is a preliminary injunction.
The judge's ruling is that the parties, two Catholic priests and the leaders of an Orthodox Jewish group, are likely to prevail at trial because the COVID-19 restrictions on religious practice run afoul of the free exercise clause.
The judge's ruling is that the parties, two Catholic priests and the leaders of an Orthodox Jewish group, are likely to prevail at trial because the COVID-19 restrictions on religious practice run afoul of the free exercise clause.
Bit of weirdness (or sloppiness) in the order, though. The prohibition on the governor and mayor's COVID-19 orders preventing indoor worship apply to the plaintiffs.
But the prohibition on orders preventing outdoor gatherings is not limited to the plaintiffs.
But the prohibition on orders preventing outdoor gatherings is not limited to the plaintiffs.
Typically, preliminary injunctions apply to protect only the parties unless the court says otherwise. Here, the court appears to say otherwise with respect to outdoor gatherings, but not indoor religious services.
If I were NY/NYC, I'd ask for clarification.
(Corrected tweet.)
If I were NY/NYC, I'd ask for clarification.
(Corrected tweet.)
Also, this is the entirety of the court's analysis of why the restriction on indoor religious worship to 25% does not pass strict scrutiny.
That *could* be right, but you're gonna hafta pay PACER to find out.
That *could* be right, but you're gonna hafta pay PACER to find out.
The news coverage on this isn't quite right.
Plaintiffs win here with respect to *indoor worship* is because other indoor activities, specifically the operation of "phase 2 businesses," was permitted on more favorable terms. That part doesn't have to do with the protests.
Plaintiffs win here with respect to *indoor worship* is because other indoor activities, specifically the operation of "phase 2 businesses," was permitted on more favorable terms. That part doesn't have to do with the protests.
The plaintiffs win with respect to *outdoor gatherings*, on the other hand, because of the favoritism given by Cuomo and de Blasio to the mass racism protests.
This is the argument we've been making all along. It violates the First Amendment to impose more burdensome COVID-19 restrictions on religious activity than on other activity—even when you dress up that other activity as "essential."
