Warning: Directory /var/www/legal-marketing-experts.com/oc-content/uploads/ not writable, please chmod to 777 in /var/www/legal-marketing-experts.com/oc-includes/htmlpurifier/HTMLPurifier/DefinitionCache/Serializer.php on line 179

Warning: Directory /var/www/legal-marketing-experts.com/oc-content/uploads/ not writable, please chmod to 777 in /var/www/legal-marketing-experts.com/oc-includes/htmlpurifier/HTMLPurifier/DefinitionCache/Serializer.php on line 179

Warning: Directory /var/www/legal-marketing-experts.com/oc-content/uploads/ not writable, please chmod to 777 in /var/www/legal-marketing-experts.com/oc-includes/htmlpurifier/HTMLPurifier/DefinitionCache/Serializer.php on line 179
Justices: California can’t enforce indoor church service ban - Legal Marketing Experts

Justices: California can’t enforce indoor church service ban

U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is telling California that it can’t bar indoor church services because of the coronavirus pandemic, but it can keep for now a ban on singing and chanting indoors.

The high court issued orders late Friday in two cases where churches had sued over coronavirus-related restrictions in the state. The high court said that for now, California can’t ban indoor worship as it had in almost all of the state because virus cases are high.

The justices said the state can cap indoor services at 25% of a building’s capacity. The justices also declined to stop California from enforcing a ban put in place last summer on indoor singing and chanting. California had put the restrictions in place because the virus is more easily transmitted indoors and singing releases tiny droplets that can carry the disease.

The justices were acting on emergency requests to halt the restrictions from South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista and Pasadena-based Harvest Rock Church and Harvest International Ministry, which has more than 160 churches across the state.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that “federal courts owe significant deference to politically accountable officials” when it comes to public health restrictions, but he said deference “has its limits.”

Roberts wrote that California’s determination “that the maximum number of adherents who can safely worship in the most cavernous cathedral is zero—appears to reflect not expertise or discretion, but instead insufficient appreciation or consideration of the interests at stake.”

In addition to Roberts, Justice Neil Gorsuch and Justice Amy Coney Barrett also wrote to explain their views. Gorsuch and Justice Clarence Thomas would have kept California from enforcing its singing ban. Barrett, the court’s newest justice, disagreed. Writing for herself and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, she said it wasn’t clear at this point whether the singing ban was being applied “across the board.”

She wrote that “if a chorister can sing in a Hollywood studio but not in her church, California’s regulations cannot be viewed as neutral,” triggering a stricter review by courts. The justices said the churches who sued can submit new evidence to a lower court that the singing ban is not being applied generally.

The court’s three liberal justices dissented, saying they would have upheld California’s restrictions. Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a dissent for herself, Justice Stephen Breyer and Justice Sonia Sotomayor that the court’s action “risks worsening the pandemic.” She said that the court was “making a special exception for worship services” rather than treating them like other activities where large groups of people come together “in close proximity for extended periods of time.” In areas of California where COVID-19 is widespread, which includes most of the state, activities including indoor dining and going to the movies are banned.

Related listings

  • Supreme Court sides with Germany in Nazi-era art dispute

    Supreme Court sides with Germany in Nazi-era art dispute

    U.S. Supreme Court 02/03/2021

    The Supreme Court is making it harder for a multimillion-dollar lawsuit involving centuries-old religious artworks obtained by the Nazis from Jewish art dealers to continue in U.S. courts.The court ruled unanimously Wednesday in a case involving the ...

  • Supreme Court sides with Germany in Nazi-era art dispute

    Supreme Court sides with Germany in Nazi-era art dispute

    U.S. Supreme Court 02/03/2021

    The Supreme Court is making it harder for a multimillion-dollar lawsuit involving centuries-old religious artworks obtained by the Nazis from Jewish art dealers to continue in U.S. courts.The court ruled unanimously Wednesday in a case involving the ...

  • Biden could change course in high court health care case

    Biden could change course in high court health care case

    U.S. Supreme Court 02/01/2021

    The pending Supreme Court case on the fate of the Affordable Care Act could give the Biden administration its first opportunity to chart a new course in front of the justices.The health care case, argued a week after the election in November, is one ...

New Rochelle, New York Personal Injury Lawyers

If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident, contact Kommer, Bave & Ollman, LLP, in New Rochelle, New York, immediately. We can answer all your questions and work with you to determine if you have the grounds for a personal injury lawsuit. The attorneys at our firm are determined to resolve even the most difficult of cases. We will work closely with you to determine the best course of action to get your claim or case resolved in the most efficient way possible. We will fight for your right to compensation! No one should have to suffer a financial burden from the result of another person’s carelessness. The attorneys at Kommer, Bave & Ollman, LLP will aggressively fight to ensure that justice is served on your behalf.