Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
Page Number: 13.0

6 

ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF BROOKLYN v. CUOMO 

GORSUCH, J., concurring 

circumstances, we may not shelter in place when the Con-
stitution is under attack.  Things never go well when we do. 

* 
That  leaves  my  colleagues  to  their  second  line  of  argu-
ment.  Maybe precedent does not support the Governor’s ac-
tions.  Maybe  those  actions  do  violate  the  Constitution.
But, they say, we should stay our hand all the same.  Even 
if the churches and synagogues before us have been subject 
to unconstitutional restrictions for months, it is no matter 
because, just the other day, the Governor changed his color 
code for Brooklyn and Queens where the plaintiffs are lo-
cated.  Now those regions are “yellow zones” and the chal-
lenged restrictions on worship associated with “orange” and
“red zones” do not apply.  So, the reasoning goes, we should
send the plaintiffs home with an invitation to return later
if need be. 

To my mind, this reply only advances the case for inter-
vention.  It has taken weeks for the plaintiffs to work their 
way through the judicial system and bring their case to us. 
During all this time, they were subject to unconstitutional 
restrictions.  Now, just as this Court was preparing to act
on  their  applications,  the  Governor  loosened  his  re-
strictions,  all  while  continuing  to  assert  the  power  to
tighten them again anytime as conditions warrant.  So if we 
dismissed  this  case,  nothing  would  prevent  the  Governor 
from reinstating the challenged restrictions tomorrow.  And 
by the time a new challenge might work its way to us, he
could  just  change  them  again.  The  Governor  has  fought
this case at every step of the way.  To turn away religious
leaders bringing meritorious claims just because the Gov-
ernor decided to hit the “off ” switch in the shadow of our 
review would be, in my view, just another sacrifice of fun-
damental rights in the name of judicial modesty.

Even our dissenting colleagues do not suggest this case is