GIVING THANKS: Amy Coney Barrett just SHUT DOWN Gov. Cuomo's attendance limits on houses of worship

In a 5-4 decision handed down on Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled against NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s attendance limits at houses of worship:

BREAKING: Supreme Court votes 5-4 to grant Catholic Diocese and orthodox Jews' request to block Gov. Cuomo's attendance limits at houses of worship in New York.

Chief Justice Roberts joins the three liberal justices in dissent.

— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) November 26, 2020

Welcome to SCOTUS, Justice Amy Coney Barrett!

These votes mark the first marked impact of Justice Amy Coney Barrett on the Court and the country.

She joined her four conservative brethren in blocking the limits whereas Justice Ginsburg anchored 5-4 majorities the other way in the spring.

— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) November 26, 2020

And “Welcome to your next 4 years, Joe Biden”:

Amy Coney Barrett’s first real major decision blocking Andrew Cuomo’s religious COVID ban is pure my political porn. Welcome to your next 4 years, Joe Biden.

— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) November 26, 2020

“Justices had turned down similar requests last summer, while Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was still on the Court”:

It's a new #SCOTUS: By a vote of 5-4, Court grants requests by Catholic diocese & synagogues in NYC to lift COVID-related attendance limits on houses of worship. Justices had turned down similar requests last summer, while Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was still on the Court.

— Amy Howe (@AHoweBlogger) November 26, 2020

Of note, Justice Gorsuch was pretty fiery as well:

Some fire from the Chief at Justice Gorsuch in tonight’s very contentious COVID opinion. https://t.co/DnqLlNz8JE pic.twitter.com/AS6ZWqlE7R

— Raffi Melkonian (@RMFifthCircuit) November 26, 2020

Recommended

Ever See a Tater Clutch His Pearls? Brian Stelter on the White House Assigning Seats in the Press Room

Eric V.

Advertisement

And:

Gorsuch wrote an opinion essentially accusing the dissenters of sending the Constitution on a “sabbatical.” CJR was not happy with that, evidently.

— Raffi Melkonian (@RMFifthCircuit) November 26, 2020

This was the correct decision:

“Members of this Court are not public health experts, and we should respect the judgment of those with special exper- tise and responsibility in this area. But even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.” – Per Curiam https://t.co/7Fmadb6uj7

— Daniel Vaughan (@dvaughanCI) November 26, 2020

***