Roberts does the bidding of his masters.
John Roberts truly is a coward. I believe he is doing the bidding of his masters. But those masters are all contained inside the man himself. His master is his desire to remain part of the “in” DC crowd. HE STANDS FOR NOTHING but himself.
I’m a Christian (and even changed churches after 23 years to one that reopened here in CA months ago), and I support religious freedom, but in “fairness” to CA one “problem” with worship services is admittedly the singing. Indoor singing is a great way (one of the best ways) to spread covid.
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Amendment I
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.
I disagree with his pessimism and I think this was a harder case than he claims, even though I agree with the majority.
It seems like he wrote his article based on the Newsweek article that he links. The Newsweek article wants to present Kagan’s argument well, but it doesn’t do a very good job because the author doesn’t understand the basic issue of the case.
The issue is not whether the State must treat religious and secular activities the same. Kagan acknowledges that it has to. The issue was the factual question of whether the State was doing that or not.
From her dissent (pardon the formatting):
“California’s response to the COVID pandemic satisfies
that neutrality rule by regulating worship services the
same as other activities “where large groups of people [come together] in close proximity for extended periods of time.” South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, 590 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (ROBERTS, C. J., concurring in denial of application for injunctive relief ) (slip op., at 2). The restricted activities include attending a worship service or political meeting; going to a lecture, movie, play, or concert; and frequenting a restaurant, winery, or bar. So the activities are both religious and secular—and many of the secular gatherings, too, are constitutionally protected. In all those communal activities, California requires mask wearing and social distancing, and bars indoor singing and chanting, to
reduce the risk of COVID transmission. In addition, the
State has put limits on how many people can assemble in
one indoor space—whether a church, theater, or lecture
hall. Depending on COVID case and test-positivity rates,
public gatherings may occur only at specified occupancy levels—for example, at 50% or 25% of a facility’s capacity. And when COVID rates are highest, all those capacity limits give way to a rule that the gathering—again, whether religious or secular—take place outdoors (with no limits on attendance).
She describes the majority opinion this way:
In any event, the result is clear:
The State may not treat worship services like activities
found to pose a comparable COVID risk, such as political
meetings or lectures. Instead, the State must treat this one communal gathering like activities thought to pose a much lesser COVID risk, such as running in and out of a hardware store. In thus ordering the State to change its public health policy, the Court forgets what a neutrality rule demands. The Court insists on treating unlike cases, not like ones, equivalently
How in the world can the liberal justices put religious exercise in the same category as hair salons, or apples and watermelons? None of those are in the 1st Amendment! Freedom to exercise one’s religion is at the very core of the foundation of this country!
Just a side note: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.
Roberts has proven over and over again that he is actually one of the leftist judges.
Then again, he voted with them when he didn’t have to. He may be playing games. How he votes only matters if it is a deciding vote.
i.e. either he is an overt leftist, or he’s only pretending to be one.
I have a sister in California whose church has held in-church Sunday services since May of 2020. No cases of the Wuhan Virus among their whole congregation, to this day. Their county sheriff has been very tolerant and the local police don’t enforce Newsome’s rules.
We see that now, especially as we see they are trying to invent other "foreign" variants.
My advice to all is to stop using the language of the enemy to discuss, explain or develop a solution for OUR side of thinking.
At least I HOPE it is our side
F'rinstance ... NO ONE IN AMERICA .... HAS BEEN "DISENFRANCHISED" IN OVER 30 YEARS (my statement), yet the word is continually used by Congress on down.
No one in America is without ID ... the lefties see to THAT .... they need the welfare stats.
WTF UP, America.
Heck the Supreme Courts has been giving 5 to 4 and 4 to 5 rulings for years depending on the ratio of liberals to conservatives....oh forgive me John Roberts. I forgot that all judges are impartial.
Kagan uses the “apples to watermelons” analogy to say churches don’t need to be treated the same as hairdressers and hardware stores. Ok. The right to visit your hairdresser or by hardware is not explicitly in the constitution, freedom to exercise religion is. If anything religious gatherings must be given wider berth than other activities.
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Federal career lawmakers don't want to dirty their voting records by exercising their 14th Amendment (14A) power to make penal code to discourage activist state actors like Gov. Newsom from abridging constitutionally enumerated protections, weaponizing state power to quarantine to abridge 1st Amendment-protected religious expression in this example.
Excerpted from the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
In other words, lawmakers have unconstitutionally surrendered their legislative powers to activist justices who know that corrupt Congress isn't going to remove them from the bench no matter how they decide a case.
The remedy for corrupt federal government is for patriots to primary (2022) candidate lawmakers who don't agree to make penal laws to discourage anti-Christian activist state actors, for example, from making things difficult for people who value their freedom of religious expression.
But electing new federal lawmakers isn't the only way for patriots to fight state abridgment of constitutionally enumerated protections.
More specifically, patriots can also work with their respective state lawmakers to amend state constitutions to discourage state actors from abusing state powers. Like they will do with bad-apple federal lawmakers, patriots need to first primary candidate state lawmakers who don't agree to take the following action with state constitutions.
State constitutions need to be amended to put time limits on lockdowns and on the mandatory wearing of masks.
State constitutions also need to be amended to make state health and environmental protection officials elected by popular vote.
Constitutionally time-limited lockdowns and limited mask requirements need to automatically trigger special recall elections for governors, mayors and disaster officials who order lockdowns and mask wearing, also state lawmakers.
Finally, constitutions need to require people planning to run for state and local offices to escrow a refundable "recall deposit" before becoming a candidate, the deposit fully paying in advance for their possible recall elections if they are elected, amounts determined by law.
In fact, each state should ultimately take the advice of Justice Brandeis who had volunteered his "laboratories of democracy" metaphor to emphasize the unique 10th Amendment powers of the states and the people to experiment with social policy, ultimately depending on what legal majority citizen voters of each state want.
"It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose [emphasis added], serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” —Justice Brandeis, Laboratories of democracy.
Finally, getting back to the big, bad federal government, in addition to giving the boot to career lawmakers who refuse to strengthen constitutionally enumerated protections, patriots also need to demand the following from the federal government.
When the federal government accuses someone of violating one of its laws, the accused needs to be informed of at least the common name of the constitutional clause that arguably justifies the law for further scrutiny of the constitutionality of that law, especially where our 2nd Amendment safety net is concerned.
Insights welcome.
But of course he did, cause he's a dick in search of one.