SCOTUS Chief Justice Roberts once again brings bewilderment upon the right-wing fringe movement that believes religion trumps all in the case of Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Steve Sisolak, Governor of Nevada, et al:
Conservative lawmakers blasted Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts after he sided with the court’s liberal wing in a 5-4 decision Friday that rejected a Nevada church’s request to block the state government from enforcing a cap on attendance at religious services.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) tweeted early Saturday morning that Roberts had “abandoned his oath.”
“What happened to that judge?” tweeted Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.).
“Freedom of religion is our first freedom. Yet SCOTUS has ruled that casinos can host hundreds of gamblers, while churches cannot welcome their full congregations. Justice Roberts once again got it wrong, shamefully closing church doors to their flocks,” Cotton added in a statement. [The Hill]
It’s starting to border on amazing that conservative lawmakers react with shock whenever a conservative justice refuses to adhere to their ideology. In this particular case, it’s not even a decision against the heart of the Nevada church’s case – it’s a decision to deny emergency injunctive relief, which basically means giving the church permission to conduct business as usual while its case proceeds in a lower Court.
That’s all.
No reasoning was presented for the majority opinion, so I can only guess that the majority has noted that churches have been a major vector for the spread of Covid-19, while movie complexes and casinos have not yet proven to be. I expect the latter may change, but at the moment why allow a church to possibly menace society while its case works its way through the court system?
Churches services are not essential services, no matter how red-faced priests, pastors, and faithful get about it. There are other options. Don’t confuse a potentially dangerous religious service configuration with a freedom of religion issue, like Justice Kavanaugh manages to do in his dissent:
For example, courts should be extremely deferential to the States when considering a substantive due process claim by a secular business that it is being treated worse than another business. … Under the Constitution, state and local governments, not the federal courts, have the primary responsibility for addressing COVID–19 matters such as quarantine requirements, testing plans, mask mandates, phased reopenings, school closures, sports rules, adjustment of voting and election procedures, state court and correctional institution practices, and the like.
But COVID–19 is not a blank check for a State to discriminate against religious people, religious organizations, and religious services. There are certain constitutional red lines that a State may not cross even in a crisis. Those red lines include racial discrimination, religious discrimination, and content-based suppression of speech.
I’m sorry, but if your religious service objectively endangers my health and life, you bet it better be suppressed. Kavanaugh tries to draw a red line, but I’m afraid the scuffing feet of Covid-19 has erased it – dispositively.
I see this as simply a ginned up issue to keep the base in line, rather than, once again, sober governance. Hysteria tends to be the Republicans’ stock in trade these days, and I’m getting tired of it. Cotton especially. He seems to be a ninny and a dick.
Good for Chief Justice Roberts.
