Religious Liberty is Protected from Arbitrary Government Action

Apologetics and the U.S. Constitution.

I’m feeling called to make Apologetics and the U.S. Constitution the theme of this blog for 2021.

I am still compiling a list of topics to cover, such as: Parental Rights to Direct a Child’s Upbringing, and Freedom from Compelled Speech.

Please send suggestions to me at michael@msochartered.com

Religious Liberty – Protected from Arbitrary Governmental Actions.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects several of our God-given rights, including the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, peaceable assembly, and freedom to petition government.

A recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court spells out the government’s duty to interfere as little as necessary with our rights.

Happy Thanksgiving from the U.S. Supreme Court to People of Faith!

Shortly before Thanksgiving, the U.S. Supreme Court prohibited NY Governor Cuomo from enforcing Covid restrictions that treated houses of worship less favorably than secular establishments.  In Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, The Court took issue with Governor Cuomo’s arbitrary and frequently-changing definitions of what constituted “essential” work. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf

Here are excerpts from the opinion:

The applicants have made a strong showing that the challenged restrictions violate “the minimum requirement of neutrality” to religion. The regulations cannot be viewed as neutral because they single out houses of worship for especially harsh treatment.

In a red zone, while a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as “essential” may admit as many people as they wish. And the list of “essential” businesses includes things such as acupuncture facilities, camp grounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.

These categorizations lead to troubling results. At the hearing in the District Court, a health department official testified about a large store in Brooklyn that could “literally have hundreds of people shopping there on any given day.”

Yet a nearby church or synagogue would be prohibited from allowing more than 10 or 25 people inside for a worship service. And the Governor has stated that factories and schools have contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but they are treated less harshly than the Diocese’s churches and Agudath Israel’s synagogues, which have admirable safety records.

Because the challenged restrictions are not “neutral” and of “general applicability,” they must satisfy “strict scrutiny,” and this means that they must be “narrowly tailored” to serve a “compelling” state interest.

Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest, but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as “narrowly tailored.” They are 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.

Not only is there no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but there are many other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services. Among other things, the maximum attendance at a religious service could be tied to the size of the church or synagogue.

It is hard to believe that admitting more than 10 people to a 1,000–seat church or 400–seat synagogue would create a more serious health risk than the many other activities that the State allows.

Conclusion.

It is great to see the Supreme Court get off the Covid sidelines and start protecting houses of worship!

Please send me your suggested topics for the Apologetics and the U.S. Constitution series.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho.  Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

© 2021 Michael S. Oswald

Published by

Michael S. Oswald, Chartered

Hi! I’m Michael Oswald. I am a business guy who also happens to be a lawyer. I love living in Boise, Idaho! I’ve also had the pleasure of living in Silicon Valley, Colorado Springs, Austin, and Orange County, CA. I started this blog so business owners and senior execs could find actionable guidance on common legal issues. Titles of posts I have previously written include: “The Managerial Overtime Exemption, and How to Keep It,” “Using a Sales Contract that speeds up Getting to Yes,” and “Tone at the Top is Vital for Preventing Sexual Harassment!” I provide a wide range of business-savvy legal services to small and medium companies and nonprofits. I am also certified to teach Real Estate Law by the Idaho Real Estate Commission. My favorite thing to do for a business is to take their standard sales contract and strip it down from an unintelligible 20-page monstrosity to a concise, 3-page doc that is easy for their customers to understand and to sign! I have experience in a number of industries, including Real Estate, Construction, Defense, and Technology (Hardware, Software and E-Commerce). I look forward to collaborating with you!

Leave a comment