Continental Says COVID Mods Are Improvement, Not Damage By Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.
Sign up for our California newsletter
You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
Primary area of interest
Thank You! Law360 (June 30, 2021, 8:15 PM EDT)
By Syndicated Content
By Brendan Pierson
(Reuters) â Though the temporary local, state and federal policies put in place to fight the COVID-19 pandemic may be expiring, they have left an indelible mark on the legal landscape, particularly in the area of religious liberty, legal experts say.
Since the addition of Justice Amy Coney Barrett shifted the Supreme Courtâs ideological balance to the right, many court watchers expect its approach to religious freedom to change accordingly.
Litigation over COVID, however, has proved to be an accelerant, thanks to the courtâs so-called shadow docket https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-usa-court-shadow-video-idUSKBN2BF16Q, giving it multiple occasions to decide religious freedom issues on emergency motions and provide little reasoning.
The Supreme Court April 9 ruled 5-4 in favor of two Indian Americans who had sued California Governor Gavin Newsom, saying their rights to livelihood and freedom of speech had been hampered by his restrictive COVID policies, which have limited indoor gatherings.
The lawsuit, Tandon vs. Newsom, was filed on behalf of aspiring Republican politician Ritesh Tandon, who launched a challenge to incumbent Congressman Ro Khanna, a Democrat, in Californiaâs 17
th district; and winemaker Dhruv Khanna, of Kirigin Cellars. Nine other plaintiffs in the lawsuit claimed Newsomâs âBlueprint for a Safer Economyâ â established in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic â had impinged on their right to worship at home or had created severe economic hardship to their business.
SCOTUS Grants Injunction to California Plaintiffs Challenging COVID-19 Restrictions
2 hours ago
On Friday, a divided Supreme Court granted an injunction to applicants challenging California’s COVID-19 restrictions on in-home religious gatherings, political activities, and business operations, consequently putting those restrictions on hold. This judgment effectively reversed the Ninth Circuit’s March 30 denial of an emergency request for relief to the same 10 individuals.
In a per curiam opinion followed by a three-justice dissent and a note that Chief Justice John Roberts would deny the aplication the majority called the Ninth Circuit’s denial of emergency relief “erroneous,” backing the applicants’ arguments that the state’s restrictions violated their free exercise of religion, speech, and assembly, as well as due process and equal protection rights.