If you're going to opine on the Roman Catholic Diocese opinion, do yourself a favor and read the actual per curiam opinion, and not just Gorsuch's (non-binding, solo) concurrence.
In particular, the per curiam suggests pretty clearly that you can, in fact, regulate churches during COVID. In particular, you seem to be able to tie attendance to the size of the facility. 2/
It seems fairly obvious that the danger in, say, St. Patrick's Cathedral is roughly the same whether you allow 10 or 25 or 50 people to worship. That probably isn't true of the neighborhood chapel. 3/
(As an aside, the observation that the 10-person cap could exclude women from attending some Orthodox services altogether, given the requirement in some for 10 men to be present to begin services) 4/
Regardless, the other major implication of the decision is that churches are essential businesses which, given the whole free exercise clause thingie, seems obviously correct. 5/
Cutting off religious service is at the core of free exercise of religion. It's the equivalent of shuttering women's health facilities or printing presses. Doesn't mean you can never do it, just means you need a really good reason. 6/
And the Court seems to think that a global pandemic can be a really good reason! (see tweets 2 and 3). Under this decision, though, you can't take a blunderbuss approach to churches and treat them differently than other businesses. 7/
Gorsuch makes the (gratuitous and counterproductive) reference to picking up a bottle of wine or buying a bike. Again, Gorsuch's opinion is just his, and no one else joins it. It's not what "the Court" says (that might be the opinion that translates to "by the court"). 8/
Gorsuch, incidentally, might be on stronger ground referencing the *workers* in the wine/bike shop, but he doesn't. Regardless, the per curiam avoids this and constrains itself to some reasonable comparisons: acupuncturists, campgrounds, garages, factories etc. 9/
Especially since we, somewhat famously, have had outbreaks at kids' camps and in factories. The per curiam also notes that in orange zones, churches get treated worse than non-essential businesses, which can set their own occupancy limits. 10/
*On top of all this* the Court says you *still* might be able to shut churches down at some point, if there were not less restrictive measures available to do so. Like tying occupancy to size. 11/
In short, this opinion at best seems to stand for the proposition that "even during a pandemic, you have to be very careful with how you treat core First Amendment guarantees," which seems quite reasonable. 12/12
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
