Seditionist Blue Falcon Democrats Stunned to Be Held Accountable for Their Behavior
Sorry, Deep State, Leaking Classified Communiques Isn't Going to Work This Time
Five Things to Be Thankful for in 2025
Can the 'Lost Generation' Be Found?
Thanksgiving to God and America
What You Got—That's All You Got
Hineni: Thanksgiving’s Answer to Ayeka
President Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation Endures
Communism Never Works, Not Even With Pilgrims
Jeffrey Epstein: A Hero to Democrats
Trump Orders Re-Vetting of Afghani Immigrants After D.C. Shooting of Two National Guardsme...
Lowe’s Home Centers to Pay $12M Penalty for Lead Paint Violations in Home...
National Guard Shooter Identified As Afghani 29-Year-Old Rahmanullah Lakanwal
From Sacred Space to Political Target: How New York Is Flirting With the...
Michigan Pharmacist Sentenced to 46 Months for $4M Medicare Fraud Scheme
Tipsheet

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement