Home » News » Masses resume in New York thanks to pro-Trump Supreme Court

Masses resume in New York thanks to pro-Trump Supreme Court

Robert Nickelsberg via Getty Images

In New York’s places of worship, restrictions had been imposed by authorities due to the coronavirus epidemic. They were struck down by the Supreme Court.

UNITED STATES – It may be that he lost the presidential election in the United States, Donald Trump will leave a lasting legacy in political life across the Atlantic. The proof with the decision of the Supreme Court Wednesday, November 25 in the evening about the holding of religious services in New York in the middle of the third wave of the Covid-19 epidemic.

State Governor Andrew Cuomo had effectively decided to drastically restrict access to masses and other celebrations: no more than ten people at services in areas of the state marked in red, and no more than 25 in those in orange. Including in churches that can accommodate thousands of people.

These restrictions were deemed too strict by several religious leaders, who decided to sue him in the name of the First Amendment of the United States constitution. It guarantees not only freedom of the press, but also freedom of worship.

Amy Coney Barrett change la donne

And the justices of the Supreme Court agreed with them. While they used to approve by five votes to four this kind of measure of the time of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a progressive judge who died on September 18, they voted the reverse on Wednesday.

It is indeed the replacement of “RBG”, Amy Coney Barrett, extremely conservative and very attached to her Catholic faith, who tipped the scales. Supreme Court President John G. Roberts Jr. was indeed the only member of the Conservative camp to join the Three Progressives in approving the New York measures. The other five conservatives, including three appointed by Donald Trump, all opposed and won.

Until now, decisions taken in the spring, in particular concerning California and Nevada (during the lifetime of Ruth Bader Ginsburg) have set a precedent in the other direction, considering that restrictions on access to worship were legitimate as long as ‘they did not discriminate against any religion in particular and that at the same time it was forbidden to practice comparable secular activities.

This Wednesday, the Supreme Court therefore changed its position and assured that the measures taken in New York were contrary to the First Amendment.

See also on the HuffPost: A mass in front of Saint-Sulpice in Paris despite the confinement

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.