SCOTUS Rules Against Cuomo's 10 Person Cap at Churches/Synagogues

Papageorgio

The Ultimate Winner
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
48,105
Reaction score
9,235
Points
2,070
Location
PNW
At a time COVID is raging and we are looking at 2000 deaths a day, the Trump Court sells out America to pander to the religious right.
There is no pandering, this is a Constitutional issue. The forefathers realized that people not only needed to healthy physically but also mentally and spiritually.

This church has been well ahead of the curve when it has come to Covid-19 and currently had no cases stemming from the church. So no one is “selling out”, they are being reasonable and are using the Constitution to guide them. Religious freedom is a basic right in our country.
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
20,875
Reaction score
14,416
Points
1,365
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law.
It seems pretty clear ...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Memorize it.
No one is preventing any worship. Only the form of it is being regulated. Churches have become super spreaders of the coronavirus.
Again, if the baby hitlers were crushing the Black Lies Matter protesters/rioters/looters as soon as they mass in the streets then your excuse would be more believable
 

debbiedowner

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
9,842
Reaction score
1,766
Points
275
It's all but impossible to stop the spread of a once-in-a-lifetime, highly contagious, deadly virus when around 30% of your population doesn't even believe it's real.

So, in a free society like ours, many lives are simply going to be sacrificed and destroyed at the altar of pure, raw, arrogant ignorance.

"Altar", pun intended.
I had just gotten up this morning turned on the TV and came into the middle of a conversation with a reporter and either a governor or hospital CEO and the reporter ask, "So what you're saying are the ones not complying with temporary restrictions should be the last to be treated or won't be accepted at the hospital"? He said that is exactly what I said they should be turned away. I don't know how they would prove it unless the person admitted to it. Who knows?
 

Mac1958

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
78,608
Reaction score
22,808
Points
2,210
Location
Opposing Authoritarian Ideological Fundamentalism.
It's all but impossible to stop the spread of a once-in-a-lifetime, highly contagious, deadly virus when around 30% of your population doesn't even believe it's real.

So, in a free society like ours, many lives are simply going to be sacrificed and destroyed at the altar of pure, raw, arrogant ignorance.

"Altar", pun intended.
I had just gotten up this morning turned on the TV and came into the middle of a conversation with a reporter and either a governor or hospital CEO and the reporter ask, "So what you're saying are the ones not complying with temporary restrictions should be the last to be treated or won't be accepted at the hospital"? He said that is exactly what I said they should be turned away. I don't know how they would prove it unless the person admitted to it. Who knows?
Yeah, I'd think that would be pretty much impossible.

We have to depend on the intelligence and common sense of citizens.

Which is why we're in this fucking mess.
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
216,770
Reaction score
42,996
Points
2,190
At a time COVID is raging and we are looking at 2000 deaths a day, the Trump Court sells out America to pander to the religious right.
There is no pandering, this is a Constitutional issue. The forefathers realized that people not only needed to healthy physically but also mentally and spiritually.

This church has been well ahead of the curve when it has come to Covid-19 and currently had no cases stemming from the church. So no one is “selling out”, they are being reasonable and are using the Constitution to guide them. Religious freedom is a basic right in our country.
Protecting the health and well being of the people is well within the realm of the Constitution.

People are free to exercise their religion without gathering in Spreader Events.
The Trump Court should know the difference
 

debbiedowner

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
9,842
Reaction score
1,766
Points
275
At a time COVID is raging and we are looking at 2000 deaths a day, the Trump Court sells out America to pander to the religious right.
There is no pandering, this is a Constitutional issue. The forefathers realized that people not only needed to healthy physically but also mentally and spiritually.

This church has been well ahead of the curve when it has come to Covid-19 and currently had no cases stemming from the church. So no one is “selling out”, they are being reasonable and are using the Constitution to guide them. Religious freedom is a basic right in our country.
Protecting the health and well being of the people is well within the realm of the Constitution.

People are free to exercise their religion without gathering in Spreader Events.
The Trump Court should know the difference
Roberts knew it.
 

iceberg

Platinum Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
29,894
Reaction score
8,746
Points
490
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law.
It seems pretty clear ...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Memorize it.
No one is preventing any worship. Only the form of it is being regulated. Churches have become super spreaders of the coronavirus.

Moron..........

No one is preventing freedom of the press when only the government is allowed to operate news agencies, just the form of it is being regulated.....

Do you see how stupid your point is?
Trolls never do.
 

Darkwind

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
27,007
Reaction score
7,840
Points
290
The Constitution deals with the federal government.

So what NYC does as far as building capacity is concerned does not violate the First Amendment.
So, if NYC wanted to reinstitute slavery, that is okay because they are not the Federal Government, right?
 

Darkwind

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
27,007
Reaction score
7,840
Points
290
SCOTUS RULES AGAINST CUOMO’S 10 PERSON CAP AT CHURCHES/SYNAGOUGES. “Even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.

The regulations cannot be viewed as neutral because they single out houses of worship for especially harsh treatment.1 In a red zone, while a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as “essential” may admit as many people as they wish. And the list of “essential” businesses includes things such as acupuncture facilities, campgrounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.

The disparate treatment is even more striking in an orange zone. While attendance at houses of worship is limited to 25 persons, even non-essential businesses may decide for themselves how many persons to admit. These categorizations lead to troubling results. At the hearing in the District Court, a health department official testified about a large store in Brooklyn that could “literally have hundreds of people shopping there on any given day.” Yet a nearby church or synagogue would be prohibited from allowing more than 10 or 25 people inside for a worship service. And the Governor has stated that factories and schools have contributed to the spread of COVID–19, but they are treated less harshly than the Diocese’s churches and Agudath Israel’s synagogues, which have admirable safety records.

Because the challenged restrictions are not “neutral” and of “general applicability,” they must satisfy “strict scrutiny,” and this means that they must be “narrowly tailored” to serve a “compelling” state interest.

Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest, but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as “narrowly tailored.” They are far more restrictive than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court, much tighter than those adopted by many other jurisdictions hard-hit by the pandemic, and far more severe than has been shown to be required to prevent the spread of the virus at the applicants’ services. The District Court noted that “there ha[d] not been any COVID–19 outbreak in any of the Diocese’s churches since they reopened,” and it praised the Diocese’s record in combatting the spread of the disease. It found that the Diocese had been constantly “ahead of the curve, enforcing stricter safety protocols than the State required.” Similarly, Agudath Israel notes that “[t]he Governor does not dispute that [it] has rigorously implemented and adhered to all health protocols and that there has been no outbreak of COVID–19 in [its] congregations.”


AMY!
What is truly frightening about this is that the decision was 5-4.

This should have been unanimous.
 

Darkwind

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
27,007
Reaction score
7,840
Points
290
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law.
It seems pretty clear ...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Memorize it.
People are still free to practice their religion just not in huge crowds.
I think that the entire point is going right past you.

The government cannot make any kind of rule, law, edict at all.

None. FULL STOP.

They lack the authority to control what you worship and HOW you worship.
 

22lcidw

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Messages
16,454
Reaction score
5,170
Points
345
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law.
It seems pretty clear ...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Memorize it.
No one is preventing any worship. Only the form of it is being regulated. Churches have become super spreaders of the coronavirus.
All of those Prog derived Antifa and BLM riots disqualifies any of this for super spreading of this so called disease.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
18,797
Reaction score
3,347
Points
290
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law
What we have are godless libs in positions of power who hate Christians and practicing religious Jews
You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. You are a piece of shit that thinks that anyone who disagrees with you is godless. Protecting people's lives is more important. Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. You honor God by living your life by God's word. Going to church does not show any commitment to God.
But using the Caesar thing in the way you are using it here can also mean you abide by the top law of the land, the Constitution.

As I noted, our church shut down voluntarily. There is no law or rule where I live shutting churches down. I have long had a problem with the idea of shutting a church down while allowing a business to stay open.

When we first did all of this I had a problem with not allowing a farmers market but allowing Wal Mart to stay open.
HNJo one is abridging our Constitution. Churches can have virtual masses. There is no regulation on that. Churches are not above the state. You have to be able to buy food somewhere.
 

Thinker101

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2017
Messages
18,516
Reaction score
5,729
Points
360
SCOTUS RULES AGAINST CUOMO’S 10 PERSON CAP AT CHURCHES/SYNAGOUGES. “Even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.

The regulations cannot be viewed as neutral because they single out houses of worship for especially harsh treatment.1 In a red zone, while a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as “essential” may admit as many people as they wish. And the list of “essential” businesses includes things such as acupuncture facilities, campgrounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.

The disparate treatment is even more striking in an orange zone. While attendance at houses of worship is limited to 25 persons, even non-essential businesses may decide for themselves how many persons to admit. These categorizations lead to troubling results. At the hearing in the District Court, a health department official testified about a large store in Brooklyn that could “literally have hundreds of people shopping there on any given day.” Yet a nearby church or synagogue would be prohibited from allowing more than 10 or 25 people inside for a worship service. And the Governor has stated that factories and schools have contributed to the spread of COVID–19, but they are treated less harshly than the Diocese’s churches and Agudath Israel’s synagogues, which have admirable safety records.

Because the challenged restrictions are not “neutral” and of “general applicability,” they must satisfy “strict scrutiny,” and this means that they must be “narrowly tailored” to serve a “compelling” state interest.

Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest, but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as “narrowly tailored.” They are far more restrictive than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court, much tighter than those adopted by many other jurisdictions hard-hit by the pandemic, and far more severe than has been shown to be required to prevent the spread of the virus at the applicants’ services. The District Court noted that “there ha[d] not been any COVID–19 outbreak in any of the Diocese’s churches since they reopened,” and it praised the Diocese’s record in combatting the spread of the disease. It found that the Diocese had been constantly “ahead of the curve, enforcing stricter safety protocols than the State required.” Similarly, Agudath Israel notes that “[t]he Governor does not dispute that [it] has rigorously implemented and adhered to all health protocols and that there has been no outbreak of COVID–19 in [its] congregations.”


AMY!
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law. None of this is true. Clearly they are legislatting from the bench. The Constitution does recognize emergencies and as it does when it allows a President to suspend habeas corpus.
Above the law? Which law is that?
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
18,797
Reaction score
3,347
Points
290
You are a piece of shit that thinks that anyone who disagrees with you is godless. Protecting people's lives is more important
Lives are not important enough to godless libs or they would end the riots that take place in democrat run cities across America

the fact is that liberals talk out of both sides of their mouth.

gov newsome tells californians to cancel Thanksgiving because it reminds the left of God

but then he attends a mask-less banquet for one of his moneybag fundraisers
Apparently lives are not important to you right wing Nazis. You have no problem with over 250,000 people dying. Cancelling Thansgiving for 1 year will not hurt anyone ande may save lives.
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
24,308
Reaction score
5,370
Points
215
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law
What we have are godless libs in positions of power who hate Christians and practicing religious Jews
You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. You are a piece of shit that thinks that anyone who disagrees with you is godless. Protecting people's lives is more important. Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. You honor God by living your life by God's word. Going to church does not show any commitment to God.
But using the Caesar thing in the way you are using it here can also mean you abide by the top law of the land, the Constitution.

As I noted, our church shut down voluntarily. There is no law or rule where I live shutting churches down. I have long had a problem with the idea of shutting a church down while allowing a business to stay open.

When we first did all of this I had a problem with not allowing a farmers market but allowing Wal Mart to stay open.
HNJo one is abridging our Constitution. Churches can have virtual masses. There is no regulation on that. Churches are not above the state. You have to be able to buy food somewhere.
You can have food delivered to you.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
18,797
Reaction score
3,347
Points
290
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law.
It seems pretty clear ...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Memorize it.
No one is preventing any worship. Only the form of it is being regulated. Churches have become super spreaders of the coronavirus.

Moron..........

No one is preventing freedom of the press when only the government is allowed to operate news agencies, just the form of it is being regulated.....

Do you see how stupid your point is?
Your point is stupid. No one is preventing on-line worship so no one is banning freedom of religion.
The 1st Amendment doesn't say "Freedom of religion as specified by the government." If any business is allowed to have more than 10 people, then you can't deny the same ability to churches, you doofus.........
Churches and businesses are 2 different things. The government is not preventing anyone from following their religious faith. Today's technology allows us to do both. Churches have been super spreaders you moron.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
18,797
Reaction score
3,347
Points
290
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law
What we have are godless libs in positions of power who hate Christians and practicing religious Jews
You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. You are a piece of shit that thinks that anyone who disagrees with you is godless. Protecting people's lives is more important. Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. You honor God by living your life by God's word. Going to church does not show any commitment to God.
But using the Caesar thing in the way you are using it here can also mean you abide by the top law of the land, the Constitution.

As I noted, our church shut down voluntarily. There is no law or rule where I live shutting churches down. I have long had a problem with the idea of shutting a church down while allowing a business to stay open.

When we first did all of this I had a problem with not allowing a farmers market but allowing Wal Mart to stay open.
HNJo one is abridging our Constitution. Churches can have virtual masses. There is no regulation on that. Churches are not above the state. You have to be able to buy food somewhere.
You can have food delivered to you.
Stores have been limited in how man people can attend. Stores have not been super spreaders unlike churches.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
18,797
Reaction score
3,347
Points
290
What we have is a Christian Taliban who put churches above the law.
It seems pretty clear ...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Memorize it.
People are still free to practice their religion just not in huge crowds.
25% or 10 people. Rules that are not in place for a place of business. If you can spread it at church, you can spread it at work.
That is not necessarily true. Many jobs are being done online.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top