Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
pepperonikkid

Roberts Fails to Uphold First Amendment Religious Rights

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

pepperonikkid

Roberts Fails to Uphold First Amendment Religious Rights

 

https://patriotpost.us

Thomas Gallatin 

Jun. 1, 2020

 

Article:

 

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 against San Diego’s South Bay United Pentecostal Church in its lawsuit against California Governor Gavin Newsom’s restriction limiting places of worship to meetings no larger than 25% of a building’s capacity or no more than 100 people, whichever is less. Tellingly, Newsom has not applied these restrictions on secular venues such as supermarkets, offices, and restaurants — none of which are listed in the First Amendment. This conflict has been a theme during lockdown.

Siding with the four liberal justices against the church, Chief Justice John Roberts contended, “Similar or more severe restrictions apply to comparable secular gatherings, including lectures, concerts, movie showings, spectator sports and theatrical performances, where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time. And the order exempts or treats more leniently only dissimilar activities, such as operating grocery stores, banks and laundromats, in which people neither congregate in large groups nor remain in close proximity for extended periods.” Essentially, Roberts views church services as “nonessential” activities. So much for the right to peaceably assemble and freely exercise religion.

 

 

Full Story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

Uhm, no, they don't and you need to brush up on your familiarity with the Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

Roberts is legislating from the bench again, as he did with the ACA.

Fauci has earwigged him. Roberts should be impeached.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrdirt73

Just curious, but how do they know what the building capacity is to begin with?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
2 minutes ago, Mrdirt73 said:

Just curious, but how do they know what the building capacity is to begin with?

 

That's generally part of building codes, based a number of factors including square footage, number of toilets in the restrooms, number/size of exits, distance to exits, etc., and a lot of it is covered in NFPA 101 - Life Safety Code.  

One rule of thumb is that, in an emergency, such a place should be able to be completely evacuated in 2.5 minutes or less.

 

  • Disagree (-1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrdirt73
17 minutes ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

That's generally part of building codes, based a number of factors including square footage, number of toilets in the restrooms, number/size of exits, distance to exits, etc., and a lot of it is covered in NFPA 101 - Life Safety Code.  

One rule of thumb is that, in an emergency, such a place should be able to be completely evacuated in 2.5 minutes or less.

 

Is that enforceable?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
33 minutes ago, Mrdirt73 said:

Is that enforceable?

 

Yes, to the best of my knowledge building codes are indeed enforceable.

:yes:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
18 minutes ago, Mrdirt73 said:

Is that enforceable?

 

Depends on the jurisdiction. NFPA codes are not 'law' but 'standards' however most parts of the country have adopted NFPA as part of their building/fire/electric codes.  I've also seen occupancy rating listed on business licenses or sometime a separate "certificate of occupancy".

I don't know how enforceable it is California. Around here (FL / GA) at worst it would be a mere "code violation"  for which the county fire inspector or whomever would issue a "notice of violation" and then you've got so many days to correct it or get fined. I suppose if it were a business like a restaurant and a repeat offender they could lose their license over it. But not really a "crime" per se.

  • Disagree (-1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrdirt73

The reason I'm asking is that if we've allowed the government to set an upper limit on how many people can be inside a building (in this case a church) then how can we claim it violates religious liberty when the same government lowers that upper limit?  Aren't they using "safety" as the reason both times?

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...