This State Is About to End Government-Sponsored Kidnapping
Federal Judge Puts Another Snag in Trump Admin's Deportation Efforts
Trump Asked Major GOP Donors Who They Want to Succeed Him. This Is...
Tucker Carlson Claims US Troops Will Rape Iranian Women. Ted Cruz Levels Him.
A Veteran Had No Family at His Funeral, So America Came Instead
IRS Docs Reveal Jennifer Siebel Newsom Reportedly Pocketed Millions From Her 'Gender Stere...
Report: Shots Fired at the U.S. Consulate in Toronto in 'National Security Incident'
The Left Has Transitioned Away From the Concept of Consent
Here Are the Radical Leftist Judges Who Said Trump Cannot End TPS for...
Oil Price Spike Reverses As President Trump Urges Tankers Into the Strait of...
President Trump Pledged to Stop Iran From Obtaining Nuclear Weapons in 2015. Now...
Secretary of War: Today Will Be Our Most Intense Day of Strikes in...
Scott Jennings Shuts Down CNN Panel Over Alleged Iranian Elementary School Strike
Rep. Andy Barr Hit With Brutal Attack Ad Over His Past Statements on...
Drag Queen Staffs School Clinic, Explains Rebranding of 'Gender-Affirming' Care to Avoid F...
Tipsheet

Supreme Court Delivers a Win for Religious Liberty in Case Against Gavin Newsom

Supreme Court Delivers a Win for Religious Liberty in Case Against Gavin Newsom
AP Photo/Mark Tenally

The Supreme Court ruled late on Friday night that California Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) does not have the power to restrict at-home prayer meetings on account of COVID, in a huge win for religious liberty. In a 5-4 ruling, the court concluded that Newsom did not have the power to restrict the rights of those practicing religion, while allowing secular activities to resume.

Advertisement

Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Barrett argued that Newsom’s edicts are discriminatory toward religious practice.

“California treats some comparable secular activities more favorably than at-home religious exercise, permitting hair salons, retail stores, personal care services, movie theaters, private suites at sporting events and concerts, and indoor restaurants to bring together more than three households at a time,” they wrote.

The conservative justices pointed out that the Ninth Circuit, where an appeal is pending, did not conclude that secular activities “pose a lesser risk of transmission than applicants’ proposed religious exercise at home.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor sided with Newsom’s restrictive order. Kagan argued that secular and at-home religious activities need not be treated equally as far as restrictions go.

Advertisement

“California limits religious gatherings in homes to three households. If the State also limits all secular gatherings in homes to three households, it has complied with the First Amendment. And the State does exactly that: It has adopted a blanket restriction on athome gatherings of all kinds, religious and secular alike. California need not, as the per curiam insists, treat at-home religious gatherings the same as hardware stores and hair salons—and thus unlike at-home secular gatherings, the obvious comparator here,” she wrote in her dissent.

The court’s ruling delivered another loss to Newsom, who is currently embattled in a recall effort.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos