Catholic & Jewish leaders win Supreme Court case against Religious Gathering Restrictions. LDS Church M.I.A.

[InfoWarrior82]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny ... story.html



Oddly, LDS church is missing in action.

[samizdat]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny ... story.html



Oddly, LDS church is missing in action.

Why is it odd? The Church of Jesus Christ has been complying with governmental restrictions of meeting capacities. But good thing was the Prophet saw ahead of the curve and already instituted a home-centered, Church-supported action plan known as "Come Follow Me."

[nightlight]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny ... story.html



Oddly, LDS church is missing in action.

Why is it odd? The Church of Jesus Christ has been complying with governmental restrictions of meeting capacities. But good thing was the Prophet saw ahead of the curve and already instituted a home-centered, Church-supported action plan known as "Come Follow Me."

Actually.... Bednar said we let them take it too far with religious restrictions

[samizdat]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny ... story.html



Oddly, LDS church is missing in action.

Why is it odd? The Church of Jesus Christ has been complying with governmental restrictions of meeting capacities. But good thing was the Prophet saw ahead of the curve and already instituted a home-centered, Church-supported action plan known as "Come Follow Me."

Actually.... Bednar said we let them take it too far with religious restrictions

Probably taken to task for it, and considering the venue, far less official than the AP letter.

[InfoWarrior82]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny ... story.html



Oddly, LDS church is missing in action.

Why is it odd? The Church of Jesus Christ has been complying with governmental restrictions of meeting capacities. But good thing was the Prophet saw ahead of the curve and already instituted a home-centered, Church-supported action plan known as "Come Follow Me."

Actually.... Bednar said we let them take it too far with religious restrictions

I wonder if the Jewish group was 501c3? The Catholic part of the suit came directly from the Brooklyn Roman Catholic Diocese. Which is basically like a stake. Is the Catholic church 501c3?

[nightlight]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny ... story.html



Oddly, LDS church is missing in action.

Why is it odd? The Church of Jesus Christ has been complying with governmental restrictions of meeting capacities. But good thing was the Prophet saw ahead of the curve and already instituted a home-centered, Church-supported action plan known as "Come Follow Me."

Actually.... Bednar said we let them take it too far with religious restrictions

Probably taken to task for it, and considering the venue, far less official than the AP letter.

Kshgauwm jdnskks....

[InfoWarrior82]

LDS Church missing in action again.


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... strictions

Supreme Court sides with churches against California on coronavirus restrictions
by Nicholas Rowan, Staff Writer | December 03, 2020 12:11 PM


The Supreme Court on Thursday sided with churches against California's coronavirus gathering restrictions.

In an unsigned opinion, the court granted the churches injunctive relief and sent the case back to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court asked the lower court to consider the churches' plea in light of a decision in which New York houses of worship sued to undo Gov. Andrew Cuomo's restrictions. In that case, the court granted an injunction to Catholic churches and Jewish synagogues, saying they were treated unequally in lockdown orders.

Attorneys for the California churches, run by Harvest Rock Church and Harvest International Ministries, celebrated the win, with Liberty Counsel Chairman Mat Staver, who is defending them, saying that "the handwriting is now on the wall" for Gov. Gavin Newsom's restrictions.

Harvest Rock has been locked in a legal debate with Newsom since July, when he ordered that all churches cease singing and move services outdoors. More recently, Newsom introduced a tiered system of reopening that drew outrage from many churches in the most restricted regions of the state.

Harvest Rock appealed to the Supreme Court in Novemeber, accusing Newsom of violating the First Amendment's free exercise clause. The church also alleged that Newsom treated churches and business unequally, pointing to an incident in which Newsom himself attended a large indoor dinner party, maskless and around a large table.

"Despite his nine-month reign of executive edicts subjugating Californians to restrictions unknown to constitutional law, the Governor continues to impose draconian and unconscionable prohibitions on the daily life of all Californians that even the Governor disregards at his own whim," the churches' complaint said.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra on Monday urged the court to ignore the church's appeal, citing the health concerns raised by the pandemic.

“Scientific knowledge concerning COVID-19 is rapidly developing and now provides even stronger support than before for the restrictions at issue,” he wrote. “More importantly, like many other parts of the nation, California is experiencing an unprecedented surge in COVID-19 cases, creating an even greater public health need for restrictions on prolonged communal gatherings in indoor places.”

The Supreme Court's decision marks the second time since Justice Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation that the court has decided in favor of churches with regard to coronavirus restrictions. The court this summer denied California and Nevada churches separate injunctions with Chief Justice John Roberts as the swing vote. Roberts at the time wrote that he was not comfortable issuing injunctions, especially with the ever-changing terms of coronavirus restrictions.

The court several other appeals from churches before it. A collection of New Jersey churches and synagogues is expected to receive a decision in the next week. Calvary Chapel, the Nevada church denied an injunction this summer, in November appealed again to the Supreme Court, and is awaiting a decision.

The court's new attitude toward coronavirus church restrictions has inspired faith leaders in many states with gathering limits still in place to speak out against them. On Wednesday, a Maine church which had previously sued Gov. Janet Mills for her lockdown orders, said that after the New York decision, the court's decision should apply more broadly.

California churches made similar arguments, with San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone saying that Newsom’s restrictions are “precisely the kind of blatant discrimination to which the Supreme Court gave injunctive relief in New York.”