Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-123_g3bi.pdf
Page Number: 89.0

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

67 

ALITO, J., concurring in judgment
ALITO, J., concurring in judgment 

ground with [CSS] by appealing to an authority within their 
shared religious tradition.”  Ibid.  One may agree or disa-
gree with the Third Circuit’s characterization and evalua-
tion of the statements of the City officials, but the court’s
analysis  highlights  the  extremely  impressionistic  inquiry 
that Smith’s targeting requirement may entail. 

Confusion and disagreement about “targeting” have sur-
faced in other cases.  Recently in Roman Catholic Diocese of 
Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 592 U. S. ___ (2020) (per curiam), there
were conflicting views about comments made by the Gover-
nor of New York.  On the day before he severely restricted
religious services in Brooklyn, the Governor “said that if the 
‘ultra-Orthodox [Jewish] community’ would not agree to en-
force  the  rules,  ‘then  we’ll  close  the  institutions  down.’ ”  
Agudath  Israel  of  America  v.  Cuomo,  980  F. 3d  222,  229 
(CA2 2020) (Park, J., dissenting).  A dissenting judge on the
Second Circuit thought the Governor had crossed the line, 
ibid., and we ultimately enjoined enforcement of the rules, 
Roman Catholic Diocese, 592 U. S., at ___.  But two Justices 
who  dissented  found  the  Governor’s  comments  inconse-
Id.,  at  ___–___  (slip  op.,  at  4–5)  (opinion  of 
quential. 
SOTOMAYOR, J., joined by KAGAN, J.).

In Stormans, Inc. v. Wiesman, 579 U. S. ___ (2016) (deny-
ing certiorari), there was similar disagreement.  That case 
featured  strong  evidence  that  pro-life  Christian  pharma-
cists  who  refused  to  dispense  emergency  contraceptives 
were the object of a new rule requiring every pharmacy to
dispense  every  Food  and  Drug  Administration-approved 
drug.  A primary drafter of the rule all but admitted that
the rule was aimed at these pharmacists, and the Governor
took  unusual  steps  to  secure  adoption  of  the  rule.    Stor-
mans,  Inc.  v.  Selecky,  854  F. Supp.  2d  925,  937–943  (WD 
Wash. 2012).  After a 12-day trial, the District Court found 
that Christian pharmacists had been targeted, id., at 966, 
987,  but  the  Ninth  Circuit  refused  to  accept  that  finding,