Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
Page Number: 29.0

Cite as:  592 U. S. ____ (2020) 

1 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 20A87 
_________________ 

ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF BROOKLYN, 
NEW YORK v. ANDREW M. CUOMO, 
GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK 

ON APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

[November 25, 2020]

 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with  whom  JUSTICE KAGAN  joins,

dissenting. 

Amidst a pandemic that has already claimed over a quar-
ter million American lives, the Court today enjoins one of
New York’s public health measures aimed at containing the 
spread  of  COVID–19  in  areas  facing  the  most  severe  out-
breaks.  Earlier this year, this Court twice stayed its hand 
when asked to issue similar extraordinary relief.  See South 
Bay  United  Pentecostal  Church  v.  Newsom,  590  U. S.  ___ 
(2020); Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak, 591 U. S. 
___ (2020).  I see no justification for the Court’s change of
heart, and I fear that granting applications such as the one 
filed by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn (Diocese) 
will only exacerbate the Nation’s suffering.1 

South  Bay  and  Calvary  Chapel  provided  a  clear  and
workable rule to state officials seeking to control the spread 
of  COVID–19:  They  may  restrict  attendance  at  houses  of 

—————— 

1 Ironically, due to the success of New York’s public health measures, 
the Diocese is no longer subject to the numerical caps on attendance it 
seeks to enjoin.  See Brief in Opposition in Agudath Israel of America v. 
Cuomo, No. 20A90, p. 17.  Yet the Court grants this application to ensure
that, should infection rates rise once again, the Governor will be unable
to reimplement the very measures that have proven so successful at al-
lowing the free (and comparatively safe) exercise of religion in New York.