Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20a136_bq7c.pdf
Page Number: 11

2  SOUTH BAY UNITED PENTECOSTAL CHURCH v. NEWSOM 

KAGAN, J., dissenting 

treated in law as though they were the same.”  Plyler v. Doe, 
457 U. S. 202, 216 (1982).  So “States must treat like cases 
alike  but  may  treat  unlike  cases  accordingly.”    Vacco  v. 
Quill,  521  U. S.  793,  799  (1997);  see  Lukumi,  508  U. S., 
at 542.1 
  California’s  response  to  the  COVID  pandemic  satisfies 
that  neutrality  rule  by  regulating  worship  services  the 
same as other activities “where large groups of people [come 
together] in close proximity for extended periods of time.”  
South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, 590 U. S. 
___, ___ (2020) (ROBERTS, C. J., concurring in denial of ap-
plication for injunctive relief ) (slip op., at 2).  The restricted 
activities  include  attending  a  worship  service  or  political 
meeting; going to a lecture, movie, play, or concert; and fre-
quenting a restaurant, winery, or bar.  So the activities are 
both religious and secular—and many of the secular gath-
erings, too, are constitutionally protected.  In all those com-
munal activities, California requires mask wearing and so-
cial  distancing,  and  bars  indoor  singing  and  chanting,  to 
reduce  the  risk  of  COVID  transmission.    In  addition,  the 
State has put limits on how many people can assemble in 
one  indoor  space—whether  a  church,  theater,  or  lecture 
hall.  Depending on COVID case and test-positivity rates, 
public gatherings may occur only at specified occupancy lev-
els—for example, at 50% or 25% of a facility’s capacity.  And 
when  COVID  rates  are  highest,  all  those  capacity  limits 
give way to a rule that the gathering—again, whether reli-
gious or secular—take place outdoors (with no limits on at-
tendance).    Given  California’s  mild  climate,  that  re-
striction—the  one  the  Court  today  lifts  for  houses  of 
worship  alone—does  not  amount to  a  ban  on  the  activity.  
Worship services, along with other gatherings, have taken 

—————— 

1 Only if a government fails this neutrality test must its policy “be jus-
tified by a compelling government interest and . . . be narrowly tailored 
to advance that interest.”  Lukumi, 508 U. S., at 531–532.