seems this is day old news
This is not a win in the sense for the constitution...should have been 9-0 and Newsom thrown in jail.
And this is why the ‘Rats want to poison SCOTUS with Democrat Party hacks.
Roberts is just going full Souter now. He’s probably deeply broken up that Coney Barrett replaced Ginsburg and ended his little one-man “saving the Court” grandstanding show.
Trump’s three appointees and Justices Thomas and Alito were the majority, and Chief Justice Roberts was in the minority. I saw it speculated earlier today that the Chief Justice on some questions now will have to get used to being in the minority, and he might for that reason retire even before Justice Breyer.
5-4 for the Constitution. I hope the 4 are proud.
“The decision noted it was the fifth time the court has rejected the Ninth Circuit’s analysis of California coronavirus restrictions.”
Most of the so-called “news” media seems to be ignoring the story.
In a narrow 5-4 ruling the Supreme Court has blocked California from stopping in-home bible study groups from their religious assembly. Chief Justice Roberts joined the three leftist judges Kagan, Bryer and Sotomayor. [pdf link here] Apparently the first amendment barely survived this visit by the high court.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
(SCOTUS BLOG) – […] In an unsigned opinion, the majority wrote that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit’s failure to put California’s COVID restrictions on hold was “erroneous.” The Supreme Court’s decisions in earlier challenges to COVID-related restrictions have, the justices wrote, “made several points clear.” Among other things, the majority stressed, government regulations are subject to heightened scrutiny whenever they treat any secular activity more favorably than religious activity; it doesn’t matter that the state also treats some secular businesses or activities poorly. Moreover, the majority added, a case may remain a live controversy even if the government changes the policy – particularly when, as here, “officials with a track record of ‘moving the goalposts’ retain authority to reinstate those heightened restrictions at any time.”
In her dissent, Kagan contended that the First Amendment “requires that a State treat religious conduct as well as the State treats comparable secular conduct.” That, she wrote, is what California has done, by adopting “a blanket restriction on at-home gatherings of all kinds.” (read more)
Roberts is such a tool.
Roberts continues to disapoint.
> Chief Justice Roberts dissented along with the three liberal justices
In other words, the four liberal justices.
Roberts showing his pinko colors as usual...
What do you expect from a traitor who sold out the voters of this country?
That wonderful RC judge that illegally adopted children from ireland. ..that judge?
BFD.
This is the amateur hour for nation’s so-called highest court.
Meanwhile, Rome is burning.
Robert’s rules against a constitutional rights again! The dirty dog!
What the heck? John Roberts went liberal on us?
This sounds like a rerun......
We will follow the Chinese soon in adopting underground churches. Very soon.