Democrats put a plan in motion to use the coronavirus to execute a massive power grab.
But one of their biggest names got some bad news.
And Amy Coney Barrett stopped the first Amendment from being destroyed with one ruling.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s vote made the difference in the 5–4 decision the Supreme Court issued late on Friday night.
The Supreme Court blocked California’s coronavirus ban on religious gatherings within private homes.
The Associated Press reported, “The order from the court late Friday is the latest in a recent string of cases in which the high court has barred officials from enforcing some coronavirus-related restrictions applying to religious gatherings.” According to the AP, “the case before the justices involved two residents of Santa Clara County in the San Francisco Bay Area, who want to host small, in-person Bible study sessions in their homes.”
“The court ruled – again – that California’s different and worse rules for the temples of God than the temples of commerce – did not withstand strict scrutiny.” tweeted Harmeet K. Dhillon, who represented the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic California has tried their best to keep churches from meeting, and have tried to keep religious activities from taking place.
The Supreme Court majority determined: “California treats some comparable secular activities more favorable 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.”
There was also no proof offered that a bible study placed people at more risk than any other activity.
The State cannot “assume the worst when people go to worship but assume the best when people go to work” the Supreme Court concluded.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined liberal Justices Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor in dissenting.
“California limits religious gatherings in homes to three households,” Justice Kagan wrote in the dissent. “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 at-home gatherings of all kinds, religious and secular alike. California need not…treat at-home religious gatherings the same as hardware stores and hair salons – and thus unlike at-home secular gatherings, the obvious comparator here.”
“And (the majority) once more commands California to ignore its experts’ scientific findings, thus impairing the State’s effort to address a public health emergency.”
Real world data shows that states that didn’t impose lockdowns fared the same as those that did.
The crisis has already passed but power hungry Democrats are still trying to keep restrictions in place.
If you want Conservative Revival to keep you up to date on any new developments in this ongoing story and the rest of the breaking news in politics please bookmark our site, consider making us your homepage and forward our content with your friends on social media and email.