Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
Page Number: 15

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

1 

KAVANAUGH, J., concurring 

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 KAVANAUGH, concurring. 
I vote to grant the applications of the Roman Catholic Di-
ocese of Brooklyn and Agudath Israel of America for tempo-
rary  injunctions  against  New  York’s  10-person  and  25- 
person  caps  on  attendance  at  religious  services.    On  this 
record, temporary injunctions are warranted because New 
York’s severe caps on attendance at religious services likely 
violate the First Amendment.  Importantly, the Court’s or-
ders today are not final decisions on the merits.  Instead, 
the  Court  simply  grants  temporary  injunctive  relief  until
the Court of Appeals in December, and then this Court as
appropriate, can more fully consider the merits. 

To begin with, New York’s 10-person and 25-person caps
on attendance at religious services in red and orange zones 
(which are areas where COVID–19 is more prevalent) are 
much more severe than most other States’ restrictions, in-
cluding the California and Nevada limits at issue in South 
Bay  United  Pentecostal  Church  v.  Newsom,  590  U. S.  ___ 
(2020), and Calvary Chapel  Dayton Valley v.  Sisolak, 591 
U. S. ___ (2020).  In South Bay, houses of worship were lim-
ited to 100 people (or, in buildings with capacity of under 
400, to 25% of capacity).  And in Calvary, houses of worship
were limited to 50 people.

New  York  has  gone  much  further.    In  New  York’s  red 
zones, most houses of worship are limited to 10 people; in