Skip to main content

Tandon v. Newsom, South Bay Pentecostal, Diocese of Brooklyn, and Calvary Chapel on Religious Liberty and the Pandemic

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
SCOTUS 2021

Abstract

On January 6, 2020, a headline in The New York Times read, “China Grapples with Mystery Pneumonia-Like Illness” and reported that “59 people in the central city of Wuhan” have been sickened by the illness, “the cause of which is unclear.” Within a few months, the World Health Organization had proclaimed COVID-19 a global “pandemic.” In the United States, and around the world, schools moved online, stores and restaurants were shuttered, travelers scrambled to return home, major sports and other events were canceled, beaches and parks were closed, and gatherings tightly restricted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 24.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 32.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Sui-Lee Wee and Vivian Wang, “China Grapples with Mystery Pneumonia-Like Illness,” The New York Times, 6 January 2020.

  2. 2.

    World Health Organization, “WHO Director-General’s Opening Remarks at the Media Briefing on COVID-19,” 11 March 2020.

  3. 3.

    Stefanie Dazio and Robert Jablon, “California Lays Out Pandemic Rules for Church Reopenings,” Associated Press, 27 May 2020.

  4. 4.

    Nevada Declaration of Emergency Directive 021, section 11, 28 May 2020.

  5. 5.

    Governor Cuomo’s Executive Order 202.68, 6 October 2020.

  6. 6.

    Maryville Baptist Church v. Beshear, 957 F.3d 610 (6th Cir. 2020) at 611.

  7. 7.

    Rev. Pete McCormick, C.S.C., Letter to the Notre Dame Community, 4 March 2020.

  8. 8.

    See Josh Blackman, “The ‘Essential’ Free Exercise Clause,” 44 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 637 (2021) at 645. Prof. Blackman’s article includes a detailed review of the relevant cases and decisions.

  9. 9.

    See Will Baude, “Foreword: The Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket,” NYU Journal of Law & Liberty 9 (2015): 1. Rather than issuing an opinion written by one specific Justice, brief orders in response to a request to enjoin (halt) a government action are often issued by the Court as per curiam, or unsigned, opinions from the Court as a whole, though individual Justices can still issue dissenting opinions.

  10. 10.

    South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom (2020), Chief Justice Roberts concurrence at 2.

  11. 11.

    Ibid.

  12. 12.

    Kavanaugh dissent, page 1.

  13. 13.

    Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak Alito dissent at 3–4.

  14. 14.

    Ibid. at 1.

  15. 15.

    Kavanaugh dissent at 3.

  16. 16.

    Ibid. at 5, citing Douglas Laycock, “The Remnants of Free Exercise,” Supreme Court Review (1990) at 49–50.

  17. 17.

    Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo per curiam decision at 1 and 5.

  18. 18.

    Sotomayor dissent at 3.

  19. 19.

    Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak, 982 F. 3d 1228 (9th Cir. 2020) at 1232.

  20. 20.

    See Blackman supra at 727. The Court ruled along the same lines in a factually similar case, on the same day, in Harvest Rock Church, Inc. v. Newsom.

  21. 21.

    South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom (2021), Kagan dissent, pages 1 and 5.

  22. 22.

    Chief Justice Roberts concurrence at 2.

  23. 23.

    Kagan dissent at 1.

  24. 24.

    Tandon v. Newsom per curiam, pages 1, 3.

  25. 25.

    See Chapter 7 on Fulton v. Philadelphia.

  26. 26.

    Fulton v. Philadelphia decision at 6.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mitchell Koppinger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Garnett, R.W., Koppinger, M. (2022). Tandon v. Newsom, South Bay Pentecostal, Diocese of Brooklyn, and Calvary Chapel on Religious Liberty and the Pandemic. In: Marietta, M. (eds) SCOTUS 2021. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88641-7_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88641-7_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-88640-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-88641-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics