Supreme Court Says Church Bans UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.
 
Last edited:
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Are bans on attending football games also unconstitutional? I haven't read it yet, but it sounds like a ridiculous ruling.

It might be but there is one major difference. The right to go to a football game isn't clearly stated in the Constitution like practicing your religion is.

But as I said, the way it is carried out very well may be. Equal protection is also in the Constitution. One very well may be able to argue that Business A is allowed to carry out their business without restrictions on the number of people so all should be able to.

Take it to court.
Pretty sure the football staduim owners agreed to not having peoole there. Pretty sure the churcjes respomse was different. This is about rights and freedom. You know those things some people think are closely related to govt handouts.

I agree it's about rights and freedoms. But it's the freedom to peaceably assemble that's in question, not the freedom of religion. They aren't being told they can practice their religion, they're being told they can't have large gatherings.
But they are practicing their religion. Their book says to gather together more and more as the day approaches.
So, answer this then - if my religion dictates human sacrifice, should I be given a pass on laws against murder?
*crickets* - always get crickets on that one.
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences.

Liberals don't attend church!
 
Is that what you (jillian) call someone who insists on the constitutional right to worship?

Leftists such as jillian have learned from their handlers that calling others "Nazis" and "fascists" makes them feel smug and superior and isn't that what really counts? They will never realize, much less admit, that fascism is Left-wing. Read Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg.
I have taken copious notes on this great and informative book, should anyone wish to ask for them. PM me, even you Leftists. I'll oblige in hopes of teaching you.
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

I'm sure the exhausted, overworked, burnt out and depressed doctors and nurses at the local hospitals are just thrilled with this decision.

I'm sure my rights aren't dependent on whether or not other people decide it's inconvenient for me to exercise them. Tell me how concerned you were about "exhausted doctors" when their workload was increased by violent leftist riots.
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.

The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".

I pity biddable fools who think reality is formed by them wishing really hard.
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.

The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".

I pity biddable fools who think reality is formed by them wishing really hard.
Fake News. Those aren't the critical issues that the Court ruled on.

GAVIN GETS SLAPPED DOWN BY CALIFORNIA JUDGE: The Golden State’s chief executive has issued anti-Covid regulations that are the most blatantly discriminatory against Christians in the nation.

Late Thursday, California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp waved the red flag, specifically citing the Supreme Court’s recent slapdown of New York Gov. Andrew "Grandma Killer" Cuomo’s similarly bigoted regulations aimed at Jewish and Catholic gatherings in Brooklyn.

It takes time for Supreme Court precedents to be applied as widely as needed, but this decision shows that Justice Alito’s efforts on behalf of the First Amendment and religious freedom are bearing fruit rather quickly.

California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp delivered a stinging rebuke of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been caught red-handed violating the rules he has laid down for the State, just as the entire San Francisco City Government has, as well as Nancy Pelosi, late Thursday, ruling against “all Covid-19 restrictions that fail to treat houses of worship equal to the favored class of entities.

The ruling came in the case of Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom, a suit brought by attorneys for the Thomas More Society on behalf of the priest and multiple Catholic parishes that were barred from holding indoor masses even as big-box stores like Walmart, movie production houses, bus stations and numerous other businesses were exempted.

The judge singled out Newsom’s recently issued “Blueprint for a Safer Economy” and “Regional Stay at Home Order” as failing to satisfy the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom of worship and practice because they aren’t applied equally and in the least restrictive manner necessary to achieve an essential public interest.

“In this case, the restrictions are not ‘neutral’ and of ‘general applicability’ because they assign entities into disparate classifications, which results in religious activities being treated less favorably than comparable secular activities,” Pelskamp wrote.​

“For example, the ‘Purple Tier’ of the ‘Blueprint for a Safer Economy,’ and the most recent ‘Regional Stay at Home Order,’ both impose a total ban on indoor religious services, while simultaneously permitting a wide range of secular indoor activities to varying degrees.​

“Entities permitted to engage in indoor activities – also known as ‘essential businesses’ or ‘critical infrastructure’ – include big-box retail stores, grocery stores, home improvement stores, hotels, airports, train stations, bus stations, movie production houses, warehouses, factories, schools, and a lengthy list of additional businesses.​

“It is important to note that almost all of the entities that are allowed to host indoor operations do not engage in activity that is constitutionally protected, whereas houses of worship do.”​

Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.

“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.​

“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”​

Amen! Your Honor!
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.

The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".

I pity biddable fools who think reality is formed by them wishing really hard.
Fake News. Those aren't the critical issues that the Court ruled on.

GAVIN GETS SLAPPED DOWN BY CALIFORNIA JUDGE: The Golden State’s chief executive has issued anti-Covid regulations that are the most blatantly discriminatory against Christians in the nation.

Late Thursday, California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp waved the red flag, specifically citing the Supreme Court’s recent slapdown of New York Gov. Andrew "Grandma Killer" Cuomo’s similarly bigoted regulations aimed at Jewish and Catholic gatherings in Brooklyn.

It takes time for Supreme Court precedents to be applied as widely as needed, but this decision shows that Justice Alito’s efforts on behalf of the First Amendment and religious freedom are bearing fruit rather quickly.

California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp delivered a stinging rebuke of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been caught red-handed violating the rules he has laid down for the State, just as the entire San Francisco City Government has, as well as Nancy Pelosi, late Thursday, ruling against “all Covid-19 restrictions that fail to treat houses of worship equal to the favored class of entities.

The ruling came in the case of Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom, a suit brought by attorneys for the Thomas More Society on behalf of the priest and multiple Catholic parishes that were barred from holding indoor masses even as big-box stores like Walmart, movie production houses, bus stations and numerous other businesses were exempted.

The judge singled out Newsom’s recently issued “Blueprint for a Safer Economy” and “Regional Stay at Home Order” as failing to satisfy the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom of worship and practice because they aren’t applied equally and in the least restrictive manner necessary to achieve an essential public interest.

“In this case, the restrictions are not ‘neutral’ and of ‘general applicability’ because they assign entities into disparate classifications, which results in religious activities being treated less favorably than comparable secular activities,” Pelskamp wrote.​

“For example, the ‘Purple Tier’ of the ‘Blueprint for a Safer Economy,’ and the most recent ‘Regional Stay at Home Order,’ both impose a total ban on indoor religious services, while simultaneously permitting a wide range of secular indoor activities to varying degrees.​

“Entities permitted to engage in indoor activities – also known as ‘essential businesses’ or ‘critical infrastructure’ – include big-box retail stores, grocery stores, home improvement stores, hotels, airports, train stations, bus stations, movie production houses, warehouses, factories, schools, and a lengthy list of additional businesses.​

“It is important to note that almost all of the entities that are allowed to host indoor operations do not engage in activity that is constitutionally protected, whereas houses of worship do.”​

Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.

“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.​

“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”​

Amen! Your Honor!

Not the final word, I stand by my comments:

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.

The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".

I pity biddable fools who think reality is formed by them wishing really hard.
Fake News. Those aren't the critical issues that the Court ruled on.

GAVIN GETS SLAPPED DOWN BY CALIFORNIA JUDGE: The Golden State’s chief executive has issued anti-Covid regulations that are the most blatantly discriminatory against Christians in the nation.

Late Thursday, California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp waved the red flag, specifically citing the Supreme Court’s recent slapdown of New York Gov. Andrew "Grandma Killer" Cuomo’s similarly bigoted regulations aimed at Jewish and Catholic gatherings in Brooklyn.

It takes time for Supreme Court precedents to be applied as widely as needed, but this decision shows that Justice Alito’s efforts on behalf of the First Amendment and religious freedom are bearing fruit rather quickly.

California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp delivered a stinging rebuke of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been caught red-handed violating the rules he has laid down for the State, just as the entire San Francisco City Government has, as well as Nancy Pelosi, late Thursday, ruling against “all Covid-19 restrictions that fail to treat houses of worship equal to the favored class of entities.

The ruling came in the case of Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom, a suit brought by attorneys for the Thomas More Society on behalf of the priest and multiple Catholic parishes that were barred from holding indoor masses even as big-box stores like Walmart, movie production houses, bus stations and numerous other businesses were exempted.

The judge singled out Newsom’s recently issued “Blueprint for a Safer Economy” and “Regional Stay at Home Order” as failing to satisfy the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom of worship and practice because they aren’t applied equally and in the least restrictive manner necessary to achieve an essential public interest.

“In this case, the restrictions are not ‘neutral’ and of ‘general applicability’ because they assign entities into disparate classifications, which results in religious activities being treated less favorably than comparable secular activities,” Pelskamp wrote.​

“For example, the ‘Purple Tier’ of the ‘Blueprint for a Safer Economy,’ and the most recent ‘Regional Stay at Home Order,’ both impose a total ban on indoor religious services, while simultaneously permitting a wide range of secular indoor activities to varying degrees.​

“Entities permitted to engage in indoor activities – also known as ‘essential businesses’ or ‘critical infrastructure’ – include big-box retail stores, grocery stores, home improvement stores, hotels, airports, train stations, bus stations, movie production houses, warehouses, factories, schools, and a lengthy list of additional businesses.​

“It is important to note that almost all of the entities that are allowed to host indoor operations do not engage in activity that is constitutionally protected, whereas houses of worship do.”​

Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.

“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.​

“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”​

Amen! Your Honor!
Not the final word, I stand by my comments:..

You can stand on your head for all I care, SCOTUS is the final word and it's SCOTUS that informs this Judge's action.

We all have Gavin Newsom's number. He is a hypocrite. He just had a multiple household, indoor dinner, all seated in close proximity, without masks, because he wanted to celebrate with a bunch of his lobbyists.

And unlike his right to gather indoors for dinner with a large crowd, the right to gather in worship is specifically outlined in the US Constitution.

Your hatred, bigotry and view of Christians as second hand citizens, may be your right, but formulating your hateful views into public policy is forbidden in our system.

Now you see why Republicans insisted that the defeated Democrat States ratify the anti-slavery 13th-14th-15th amendments so that never again could Democrats relegate others to second class status.
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.

The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".

I pity biddable fools who think reality is formed by them wishing really hard.
Fake News. Those aren't the critical issues that the Court ruled on.

GAVIN GETS SLAPPED DOWN BY CALIFORNIA JUDGE: The Golden State’s chief executive has issued anti-Covid regulations that are the most blatantly discriminatory against Christians in the nation.

Late Thursday, California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp waved the red flag, specifically citing the Supreme Court’s recent slapdown of New York Gov. Andrew "Grandma Killer" Cuomo’s similarly bigoted regulations aimed at Jewish and Catholic gatherings in Brooklyn.

It takes time for Supreme Court precedents to be applied as widely as needed, but this decision shows that Justice Alito’s efforts on behalf of the First Amendment and religious freedom are bearing fruit rather quickly.

California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp delivered a stinging rebuke of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been caught red-handed violating the rules he has laid down for the State, just as the entire San Francisco City Government has, as well as Nancy Pelosi, late Thursday, ruling against “all Covid-19 restrictions that fail to treat houses of worship equal to the favored class of entities.

The ruling came in the case of Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom, a suit brought by attorneys for the Thomas More Society on behalf of the priest and multiple Catholic parishes that were barred from holding indoor masses even as big-box stores like Walmart, movie production houses, bus stations and numerous other businesses were exempted.

The judge singled out Newsom’s recently issued “Blueprint for a Safer Economy” and “Regional Stay at Home Order” as failing to satisfy the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom of worship and practice because they aren’t applied equally and in the least restrictive manner necessary to achieve an essential public interest.

“In this case, the restrictions are not ‘neutral’ and of ‘general applicability’ because they assign entities into disparate classifications, which results in religious activities being treated less favorably than comparable secular activities,” Pelskamp wrote.​

“For example, the ‘Purple Tier’ of the ‘Blueprint for a Safer Economy,’ and the most recent ‘Regional Stay at Home Order,’ both impose a total ban on indoor religious services, while simultaneously permitting a wide range of secular indoor activities to varying degrees.​

“Entities permitted to engage in indoor activities – also known as ‘essential businesses’ or ‘critical infrastructure’ – include big-box retail stores, grocery stores, home improvement stores, hotels, airports, train stations, bus stations, movie production houses, warehouses, factories, schools, and a lengthy list of additional businesses.​

“It is important to note that almost all of the entities that are allowed to host indoor operations do not engage in activity that is constitutionally protected, whereas houses of worship do.”​

Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.

“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.​

“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”​

Amen! Your Honor!

Not the final word, I stand by my comments:

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.

And I stand by my comments:

The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.

The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".

I pity biddable fools who think reality is formed by them wishing really hard.
Fake News. Those aren't the critical issues that the Court ruled on.

GAVIN GETS SLAPPED DOWN BY CALIFORNIA JUDGE: The Golden State’s chief executive has issued anti-Covid regulations that are the most blatantly discriminatory against Christians in the nation.

Late Thursday, California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp waved the red flag, specifically citing the Supreme Court’s recent slapdown of New York Gov. Andrew "Grandma Killer" Cuomo’s similarly bigoted regulations aimed at Jewish and Catholic gatherings in Brooklyn.

It takes time for Supreme Court precedents to be applied as widely as needed, but this decision shows that Justice Alito’s efforts on behalf of the First Amendment and religious freedom are bearing fruit rather quickly.

California Superior Court Judge Gregory Pulskamp delivered a stinging rebuke of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been caught red-handed violating the rules he has laid down for the State, just as the entire San Francisco City Government has, as well as Nancy Pelosi, late Thursday, ruling against “all Covid-19 restrictions that fail to treat houses of worship equal to the favored class of entities.

The ruling came in the case of Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom, a suit brought by attorneys for the Thomas More Society on behalf of the priest and multiple Catholic parishes that were barred from holding indoor masses even as big-box stores like Walmart, movie production houses, bus stations and numerous other businesses were exempted.

The judge singled out Newsom’s recently issued “Blueprint for a Safer Economy” and “Regional Stay at Home Order” as failing to satisfy the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom of worship and practice because they aren’t applied equally and in the least restrictive manner necessary to achieve an essential public interest.

“In this case, the restrictions are not ‘neutral’ and of ‘general applicability’ because they assign entities into disparate classifications, which results in religious activities being treated less favorably than comparable secular activities,” Pelskamp wrote.​

“For example, the ‘Purple Tier’ of the ‘Blueprint for a Safer Economy,’ and the most recent ‘Regional Stay at Home Order,’ both impose a total ban on indoor religious services, while simultaneously permitting a wide range of secular indoor activities to varying degrees.​

“Entities permitted to engage in indoor activities – also known as ‘essential businesses’ or ‘critical infrastructure’ – include big-box retail stores, grocery stores, home improvement stores, hotels, airports, train stations, bus stations, movie production houses, warehouses, factories, schools, and a lengthy list of additional businesses.​

“It is important to note that almost all of the entities that are allowed to host indoor operations do not engage in activity that is constitutionally protected, whereas houses of worship do.”​

Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.

“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.​

“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”​

Amen! Your Honor!

Not the final word, I stand by my comments:

Stupid people will go to church, bring their kids and suffer the consequences. Some will die, some will receive massive bills for staying in an ICU, and others will go out and about an infect other stupid people who roam about in close contact without a mask in the open.

I'm not using "stupid" as a pejorative, I pity biddable fools who won't protect themselves and their communities.
And I stand by my comments:
You can stand on you head for all I care. SCOTUS has the final say, and they communicated it quite clearly, this Judge has applied it flawlessly.
... The stupidest people of all will ASSume that behavior they like is no risk, while behavior they dislike is automatically causing massive breakouts, and never bother to find any stats to support that ASSumption before running around shouting about how it's "fact" and "science".
Yes, What Gavin Newsom did was not only horrible, it was hypocritical. No one listens to him, no one defends him. He has stripped himself of all moral authority. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets recalled.
 
Unfortunate result when rule by the court is done from a religious and political perspective instead of ceding to the science and public health.
Common sense...out the window we go!
Fake News. Bigotry disguised as science remains bigotry.

Tyranny reversed: California judge slaps down Newsom over religious-worship shutdowns
Placeholder Image
“Why can someone safely walk down a grocery store aisle but not a pew?”


Just how huge a precedent will the recent Supreme Court decision in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn turn out to be? We can take one measure from a California court late yesterday in Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom. In a stinging rebuke to Gov. Adolf Newsom, Judge Gregory Pulskamp imposed an injunction against enforcement of California’s planned COVID-19 restrictions. Using Brooklyn as a guide, Pulskamp ripped California’s arbitrary decision to shut down houses of worship while allowing commercial businesses to remain open.

As we all know, any such limitation on an explicit and textual constitutional right requires a strict scrutiny standard, Pulskamp cited Brooklyn for support. But Pulskamp wonders whether the restrictions even pass a smell test. In fact, Newsom’s order for a blanket ban on worship services was even harsher than Andrew Cuomo’s orders that prompted the Brooklyn decision, Pulskamp notes:
However, Defendants’ efforts to distinguish the permitted secular activity from the prohibited religious activity are not persuasive. For example, Defendants contend that the congregations of shoppers in big-box stores, grocery stores, etc., are not comparable to religious services in terms of crowd size, proximity, and length of stay. To the contrary, based on the evidence presented (or lack thereof) and common knowledge, it appears that shoppers at a Costco, Walmart, Home Depot, etc. may – and frequently do – congregate in numbers, proximity, and duration that is very comparable to worshippers in houses of worship.
Similar Exposure
Defendants have not convincingly established that the health risks associated with houses of worship would be any different than “essential businesses” or “critical infrastructure,” assuming the same requirements of social distancing and the wearing of masks were applied across the board. …
False Distinctions
In addition, the restrictions at issue in this case are not “narrowly tailored” because the occupancy limits imposed on places of worship by the Purple Tier of the Blueprint for a Safer Economy and the Regional Stay at Home Order are zero – a total and complete ban of indoor religious services. These restrictions are arguably harsher than any other set of restrictions considered by the courts in all of the cases cited by the parties in this action.
Newsome Worse Than Cuomo
In Roman Catholic Diocese, the court considered New York’s religious services occupancy limits of 10 persons in “Red Zones” and 25 persons in “orange zones” to be “very severe restrictions” and “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.” (Roman Catholic Diocese, supra, at p. 1, 2.)
They view the Religious as Second Class and used COVID to ban religious gatherings.
What then should the courts think of California’s total ban on indoor services? “Narrowly tailored” regulations mean “the least restrictive means available” and may potentially include a variety of less draconian measures such as “social distancing, wearing masks, leaving doors and windows open, forgoing singing, and disinfecting spaces between services.” (Roman Catholic Diocese, supra, at p. 4 (conc. opn. of Gorsuch, J.).) Therefore, it seems highly probable that Plaintiffs will prevail in this case should the matter proceed to trial.
Pulskamp quotes Good Justice Brett Kavanaugh from a dissent in the earlier South Bay United case, one of the precursors to Brooklyn, in pointing out the absurdity of the disparate treatment of religious houses:
“Assuming all of the same precautions are taken, why can someone safely walk down a grocery store aisle but not a pew? And why can someone safely interact with a brave deliverywoman but not with a stoic minister? … The State cannot ‘assume the worst when people go to worship but assume the best when people go to work or go about the rest of their daily lives in permitted social settings.'”
In other words, this shows a demonstrable hostility to religious expression, which is on its face unconstitutional — and was at the time of South Bay United, for that matter. The Supreme Court chose at that time to defer to governors but finally drew a line in the sand with Brooklyn. And now that judges have seen the line drawn, they can clearly and justly deal with abusive and arbitrary examples of tyrannical rule-by-whim, such as Adolf Newsom’s order in California.

Mark Tapscott reports on the reaction from Thomas More Society counsel Chris Ferrara, who called this decision a vindication of religious liberty rights:
Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.
And End To "Progressive" Anti-Religious Tyranny under the guise of "Public Health"
“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.
These Totalitarians Are Hateful Scum
“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”
It’s important to note that this does not spell the end of the case in Burfitt. This just enjoins California from enforcing its current restrictions while the case continues. Perhaps Newsom will rethink his approach before this comes back before Pulskamp … but then again, one might have thought Newsom would have done so after Brooklyn, too. The tyrannical impulse dies hard.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunate result when rule by the court is done from a religious and political perspective instead of ceding to the science and public health.
Common sense...out the window we go!
Fake News. Bigotry disguised as science remains bigotry.

Tyranny reversed: California judge slaps down Newsom over religious-worship shutdowns
Placeholder Image
“Why can someone safely walk down a grocery store aisle but not a pew?”


Just how huge a precedent will the recent Supreme Court decision in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn turn out to be? We can take one measure from a California court late yesterday in Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom. In a stinging rebuke to Gov. Adolf Newsom, Judge Gregory Pulskamp imposed an injunction against enforcement of California’s planned COVID-19 restrictions. Using Brooklyn as a guide, Pulskamp ripped California’s arbitrary decision to shut down houses of worship while allowing commercial businesses to remain open.

As we all know, any such limitation on an explicit and textual constitutional right requires a strict scrutiny standard, Pulskamp cited Brooklyn for support. But Pulskamp wonders whether the restrictions even pass a smell test. In fact, Newsom’s order for a blanket ban on worship services was even harsher than Andrew Cuomo’s orders that prompted the Brooklyn decision, Pulskamp notes:
However, Defendants’ efforts to distinguish the permitted secular activity from the prohibited religious activity are not persuasive. For example, Defendants contend that the congregations of shoppers in big-box stores, grocery stores, etc., are not comparable to religious services in terms of crowd size, proximity, and length of stay. To the contrary, based on the evidence presented (or lack thereof) and common knowledge, it appears that shoppers at a Costco, Walmart, Home Depot, etc. may – and frequently do – congregate in numbers, proximity, and duration that is very comparable to worshippers in houses of worship.
Similar Exposure
Defendants have not convincingly established that the health risks associated with houses of worship would be any different than “essential businesses” or “critical infrastructure,” assuming the same requirements of social distancing and the wearing of masks were applied across the board. …
False Distinctions
In addition, the restrictions at issue in this case are not “narrowly tailored” because the occupancy limits imposed on places of worship by the Purple Tier of the Blueprint for a Safer Economy and the Regional Stay at Home Order are zero – a total and complete ban of indoor religious services. These restrictions are arguably harsher than any other set of restrictions considered by the courts in all of the cases cited by the parties in this action.
Newsome Worse Than Cuomo
In Roman Catholic Diocese, the court considered New York’s religious services occupancy limits of 10 persons in “Red Zones” and 25 persons in “orange zones” to be “very severe restrictions” and “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.” (Roman Catholic Diocese, supra, at p. 1, 2.)
They view the Religious as Second Class and used COVID to ban religious gatherings.
What then should the courts think of California’s total ban on indoor services? “Narrowly tailored” regulations mean “the least restrictive means available” and may potentially include a variety of less draconian measures such as “social distancing, wearing masks, leaving doors and windows open, forgoing singing, and disinfecting spaces between services.” (Roman Catholic Diocese, supra, at p. 4 (conc. opn. of Gorsuch, J.).) Therefore, it seems highly probable that Plaintiffs will prevail in this case should the matter proceed to trial.
Pulskamp quotes Good Justice Brett Kavanaugh from a dissent in the earlier South Bay United case, one of the precursors to Brooklyn, in pointing out the absurdity of the disparate treatment of religious houses:
“Assuming all of the same precautions are taken, why can someone safely walk down a grocery store aisle but not a pew? And why can someone safely interact with a brave deliverywoman but not with a stoic minister? … The State cannot ‘assume the worst when people go to worship but assume the best when people go to work or go about the rest of their daily lives in permitted social settings.'”
In other words, this shows a demonstrable hostility to religious expression, which is on its face unconstitutional — and was at the time of South Bay United, for that matter. The Supreme Court chose at that time to defer to governors but finally drew a line in the sand with Brooklyn. And now that judges have seen the line drawn, they can clearly and justly deal with abusive and arbitrary examples of tyrannical rule-by-whim, such as Adolf Newsom’s order in California.

Mark Tapscott reports on the reaction from Thomas More Society counsel Chris Ferrara, who called this decision a vindication of religious liberty rights:
Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.
And End To "Progressive" Anti-Religious Tyranny under the guise of "Public Health"
“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.
These Totalitarians Are Hateful Scum
“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”
It’s important to note that this does not spell the end of the case in Burfitt. This just enjoins California from enforcing its current restrictions while the case continues. Perhaps Newsom will rethink his approach before this comes back before Pulskamp … but then again, one might have thought Newsom would have done so after Brooklyn, too. The tyrannical impulse dies hard.
You don't have to go to church to worship. If there really is a Jesus like the one in the bible I doubt that he would want people to risk their lives and the lives of others by going to church.
 
Unfortunate result when rule by the court is done from a religious and political perspective instead of ceding to the science and public health.
Common sense...out the window we go!
Fake News. Bigotry disguised as science remains bigotry.

Tyranny reversed: California judge slaps down Newsom over religious-worship shutdowns
Placeholder Image
“Why can someone safely walk down a grocery store aisle but not a pew?”


Just how huge a precedent will the recent Supreme Court decision in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn turn out to be? We can take one measure from a California court late yesterday in Father Trevor Burfitt v Gavin Newsom. In a stinging rebuke to Gov. Adolf Newsom, Judge Gregory Pulskamp imposed an injunction against enforcement of California’s planned COVID-19 restrictions. Using Brooklyn as a guide, Pulskamp ripped California’s arbitrary decision to shut down houses of worship while allowing commercial businesses to remain open.

As we all know, any such limitation on an explicit and textual constitutional right requires a strict scrutiny standard, Pulskamp cited Brooklyn for support. But Pulskamp wonders whether the restrictions even pass a smell test. In fact, Newsom’s order for a blanket ban on worship services was even harsher than Andrew Cuomo’s orders that prompted the Brooklyn decision, Pulskamp notes:
However, Defendants’ efforts to distinguish the permitted secular activity from the prohibited religious activity are not persuasive. For example, Defendants contend that the congregations of shoppers in big-box stores, grocery stores, etc., are not comparable to religious services in terms of crowd size, proximity, and length of stay. To the contrary, based on the evidence presented (or lack thereof) and common knowledge, it appears that shoppers at a Costco, Walmart, Home Depot, etc. may – and frequently do – congregate in numbers, proximity, and duration that is very comparable to worshippers in houses of worship.
Similar Exposure
Defendants have not convincingly established that the health risks associated with houses of worship would be any different than “essential businesses” or “critical infrastructure,” assuming the same requirements of social distancing and the wearing of masks were applied across the board. …
False Distinctions
In addition, the restrictions at issue in this case are not “narrowly tailored” because the occupancy limits imposed on places of worship by the Purple Tier of the Blueprint for a Safer Economy and the Regional Stay at Home Order are zero – a total and complete ban of indoor religious services. These restrictions are arguably harsher than any other set of restrictions considered by the courts in all of the cases cited by the parties in this action.
Newsome Worse Than Cuomo
In Roman Catholic Diocese, the court considered New York’s religious services occupancy limits of 10 persons in “Red Zones” and 25 persons in “orange zones” to be “very severe restrictions” and “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.” (Roman Catholic Diocese, supra, at p. 1, 2.)
They view the Religious as Second Class and used COVID to ban religious gatherings.
What then should the courts think of California’s total ban on indoor services? “Narrowly tailored” regulations mean “the least restrictive means available” and may potentially include a variety of less draconian measures such as “social distancing, wearing masks, leaving doors and windows open, forgoing singing, and disinfecting spaces between services.” (Roman Catholic Diocese, supra, at p. 4 (conc. opn. of Gorsuch, J.).) Therefore, it seems highly probable that Plaintiffs will prevail in this case should the matter proceed to trial.
Pulskamp quotes Good Justice Brett Kavanaugh from a dissent in the earlier South Bay United case, one of the precursors to Brooklyn, in pointing out the absurdity of the disparate treatment of religious houses:
“Assuming all of the same precautions are taken, why can someone safely walk down a grocery store aisle but not a pew? And why can someone safely interact with a brave deliverywoman but not with a stoic minister? … The State cannot ‘assume the worst when people go to worship but assume the best when people go to work or go about the rest of their daily lives in permitted social settings.'”
In other words, this shows a demonstrable hostility to religious expression, which is on its face unconstitutional — and was at the time of South Bay United, for that matter. The Supreme Court chose at that time to defer to governors but finally drew a line in the sand with Brooklyn. And now that judges have seen the line drawn, they can clearly and justly deal with abusive and arbitrary examples of tyrannical rule-by-whim, such as Adolf Newsom’s order in California.

Mark Tapscott reports on the reaction from Thomas More Society counsel Chris Ferrara, who called this decision a vindication of religious liberty rights:
Thomas More Senior Counsel Chris Ferrara lauded the decision, saying, “after more than nine months of tyranny in the name of ‘containing the spread’ of a virus they have failed to contain, the gubernatorial dictators presiding over draconian lockdowns are running out of runway on their claim that churches are somehow more dangerous viral vectors than any of the litany of ‘essential businesses’ crowded with customers that they allow to operate at 100% capacity.
And End To "Progressive" Anti-Religious Tyranny under the guise of "Public Health"
“The Supreme Court’s decision in Brooklyn Diocese v. Cuomo has opened the way to the liberation of churches from the absurd and bigoted superstition that they are veritable death chambers threatening the entire population.
These Totalitarians Are Hateful Scum
“Not even hair salons, which by the services offered necessitate close personal contact, have been subjected to the onerous and barefaced biases heaped upon houses of worship.”
It’s important to note that this does not spell the end of the case in Burfitt. This just enjoins California from enforcing its current restrictions while the case continues. Perhaps Newsom will rethink his approach before this comes back before Pulskamp … but then again, one might have thought Newsom would have done so after Brooklyn, too. The tyrannical impulse dies hard.
You don't have to go to church to worship. If there really is a Jesus like the one in the bible I doubt that he would want people to risk their lives and the lives of others by going to church.
My family members haven't backed up one bit from this Covid thing in fear, and they have been going to church just like they always have since the thing started (we all have). They are in their 80's and above.
 
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Newsom’s Indoor Worship Bans


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictions on indoor worship services, agreeing with religious groups they are unconstitutional.

The High Court granted a petition from Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena that sought to overturn a lower court’s ruling in favor of Newsom’s restrictions.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s decision last week in a similar case in which it ruled in favor of faith groups that challenged New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) worship restrictions.

-------------------------------------

Gruesome Newsom is a Leftist idiot. Even wacky Californians are circulating a petition to recall him.
I have started a Christmas thread! I would like to invite all on this thread to spread some holliday cheer. Please come over and wish everyone one a merry Christmas no matter their political leanings. I would greatly appreciate it!
 

Forum List

Back
Top