No. 20A137 HARVEST ROCK CHURCH, INC.; HARVEST INTERNATIONAL MINISTRY, INC., ITSELF AND ON BEHALF OF ITS MEMBER CHURCHES IN CALIFORNIA, Applicants, v. GAVIN NEWSOM, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent. On Emergency Application for Writ of Injunction to the Honorable Elena Kagan, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court and Circuit Justice for the Ninth Circuit MOTION BY RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL-RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS, WITH ATTACHED PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT AND IN OPPOSITION TO EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF INJUNCTION, FOR LEAVE (1) TO FILE THE BRIEF, (2) TO DO SO IN AN UNBOUND FORMAT ON 8½-BY-11-INCH PAPER, AND (3) TO DO SO WITHOUT TEN DAYS’ ADVANCE NOTICE TO THE PARTIES RICHARD B. KATSKEE ALEX J. LUCHENITSER Counsel of Record ALEXANDER GOUZOULES Americans United for Separation of Church and State 1310 L St. NW, Ste. 200 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 466-7306 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae MOTION FOR LEAVE (1) TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL-RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT AND IN OPPOSITION TO EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF INJUNCTION, (2) TO DO SO IN AN UNBOUND FORMAT ON 8½-BY-11-INCH PAPER, AND (3) TO DO SO WITHOUT TEN DAYS’ ADVANCE NOTICE TO THE PARTIES1 Movants, religious and civil-rights organizations that share a commitment to preserving the constitutional principles of religious freedom and the separation of religion and government, respectfully request leave of the Court to (1) file the attached amicus curiae brief in support of respondent and in opposition to applicants’ emergency application for a writ of injunction, (2) file the brief in an unbound format on 8½-by-11-inch paper, and (3) file the brief without ten days’ advance notice to the parties. Positions of the Parties Applicants do not consent to this motion. Respondent consents to this motion. Identities of Amici; Rule 29.6 Statement All the proposed amici are nonprofit organizations that have no parent corporations and that are not owned, in whole or in part, by any publicly held corporation. The proposed amici are:  Americans United for Separation of Church and State.  ADL (Anti-Defamation League).  Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice.  Central Conference of American Rabbis. 1 No counsel for a party authored this motion or the proposed amicus brief in whole or in part, and no person other than amici, their members, or their counsel made a monetary contribution to fund the motion’s or brief’s preparation or submission. 1  Covenant Network of Presbyterians.  Disciples Center for Public Witness.  Disciples Justice Action Network.  Equal Partners in Faith.  General Synod of the United Church of Christ.  Interfaith Alliance Foundation.  Methodist Federation for Social Action.  National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA.  Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association.  Union for Reform Judaism. Interests of Amici; Summary of Brief2 Applicants contend that application of California’s COVID-19-related public- health restrictions to their religious gatherings violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The proposed brief would bring to the Court’s attention the perspectives of other religious institutions and clergy on the matter. The brief explains that the proposed amici believe that the right to worship enshrined in the Free Exercise Clause is precious, but that the Clause was never intended or originally understood to require religious exemptions from laws that protect public health or safety. The Clause was enacted not for that purpose, but to 2 This brief is substantially similar to the brief submitted by largely the same amici in Gish v. Newsom, No. 20A120 (docketed Jan. 8, 2021), and South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, No. 20A136 (submitted Jan. 25, 2021). The primary differences are in the factual discussion on pages 14 and 15. 2 address a long history of governmental efforts to suppress particular religious groups based on disapproval of them or their beliefs. And the writings of leading Founders and early state constitutions and cases all demonstrate that the right to free exercise was not viewed during the Founding Era as overriding laws meant to ensure public safety. Extending this Court’s decision in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 141 S. Ct. 63 (2020) (per curiam), to the far different facts at issue here would be contrary to this original understanding and would improperly obstruct California’s carefully tailored efforts to stanch a devastating pandemic surge that is overwhelming its healthcare system. Format and Timing of Filing Applicants’ emergency application was docketed on January 26, 2021. In light of the January 29, 2021 deadline that has been set for responding to the application, there was insufficient time for the proposed amici to prepare their brief for printing and filing in booklet form, as ordinarily required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1. Nor, for the same reason, were the proposed amici able to provide the parties with ten days’ notice of their intent to file the attached brief, as ordinarily required by Rule 37.2(a). But the proposed amici did provide notice of their intent to file the brief to the parties within hours of the application’s appearance on the Court’s public docket. * * * * * For the foregoing reasons, the proposed amici respectfully request that the Court grant this motion to file the attached proposed amicus brief and accept it in the format and at the time submitted. 3 Respectfully submitted. _R___________________I________C_______________H__________________A_______________R_______________D________________ ______B___________________._______ ______K____________________A________________T_____________S______________K________________E_______________E_______________ _____________________ ALEX J. LUCHENITSER Counsel of Record ALEXANDER GOUZOULES Americans United for Separation of Church and State 1310 L St. NW, Ste. 200 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 466-7306 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae JANUARY 2021 4 No. 20A137 HARVEST ROCK CHURCH, INC.; HARVEST INTERNATIONAL MINISTRY, INC., ITSELF AND ON BEHALF OF ITS MEMBER CHURCHES IN CALIFORNIA, Applicants, v. GAVIN NEWSOM, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent. On Emergency Application for Writ of Injunction to the Honorable Elena Kagan, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court and Circuit Justice for the Ninth Circuit BRIEF OF RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL-RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT AND IN OPPOSITION TO EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF INJUNCTION RICHARD B. KATSKEE ALEX J. LUCHENITSER Counsel of Record ALEXANDER GOUZOULES Americans United for Separation of Church and State 1310 L St. NW, Ste. 200 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 466-7306 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................... ii INTERESTS OF THE AMICI CURIAE ........................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................................... 3 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................. 4 A. The Free Exercise Clause was neither intended nor originally understood to require exemptions from laws that protect the health and safety of the public ................................................................................................................... 4 1. The intent and writings of the Founders ...................................................... 4 2. Early state constitutions and court decisions ............................................... 8 B. The Free Exercise Clause does not mandate a religious exemption from California’s restrictions on gatherings ............................................................. 10 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 15 i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) CASES Agudath Israel of America v. Cuomo, 980 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2020) .................................................................................... 13 American Legion v. American Humanist Association, 139 S. Ct. 2067 (2019) .............................................................................................. 4 Application of President & Directors of Georgetown College, Inc., 331 F.2d 1000 (D.C. Cir. 1964)............................................................................... 12 Bowen v. Roy, 476 U.S. 693 (1986) .................................................................................................. 6 Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak, 140 S. Ct. 2603 (2020) .............................................................................................. 3 Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993) .................................................................................................. 6 City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997) .................................................................................................. 7 Communist Party of U.S. v. Subversive Activities Control Board, 367 U.S. 1 (1961) ...................................................................................................... 5 District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) .................................................................................................. 4 Donahoe v. Richards, 38 Me. 379 (Me. 1854) ............................................................................................ 10 Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) .................................................................................................. 5 Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) .................................................................................................. 5, 6 Gish v. Newsom, No. 20A120 (docketed Jan. 8, 2021) ......................................................................... 3 Hannibal & St. Joseph R.R. Co. v. Husen, 95 U.S. 465 (1877) .................................................................................................. 11 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—continued Page(s) Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) ............................................................................................ 11, 12 Larkin v. Grendel’s Den, Inc., 459 U.S. 116 (1982) .................................................................................................. 5 Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 485 U.S. 439 (1988) ................................................................................................ 10 Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 138 S. Ct. 1719 (2018) .............................................................................................. 6 McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) .............................................................................................. 4, 5 Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, 140 S. Ct. 2049 (2020) ............................................................................................ 10 Phillips v. Gratz, 2 Pen. & W. 412 (Pa. 1831) .................................................................................... 10 Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944) .......................................................................................... 11, 12 Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 141 S. Ct. 63 (2020) ......................................................................................... passim Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) ................................................................................................ 12 South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, 140 S. Ct. 1613 (2020) .............................................................................................. 3 South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, __ F. Supp. 3d __, No. 20-cv-865, 2020 WL 7488974 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2020), aff’d, __ F.3d __, No. 20-56358, 2021 WL 222814 (9th Cir. Jan. 22, 2021) .......................................................................................... 14 South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, No. 20A136 (submitted Jan. 25, 2021) .................................................................... 3 Town of Greece v. Galloway, 572 U.S. 565 (2014) .................................................................................................. 4 Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, 137 S. Ct. 2012 (2017) .............................................................................................. 6 Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) ................................................................................................ 12 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—continued Page(s) Wright v. DeWitt School District No. 1, 385 S.W.2d 644 (Ark. 1965) ................................................................................... 12 CONSTITUTIONS AND STATUTES Del. Decl. of Rights, § 3 (1776) ...................................................................................... 8 Ga. Const., art. LVI (1777) ........................................................................................ 8, 9 Mass. Const., art. II (1780) ............................................................................................ 9 Md. Const., art. XXXIII (1776) ...................................................................................... 8 N.H. Const., part I, art. 4 (1784) ................................................................................... 9 N.Y. Const., art. XXXVIII (1777) .................................................................................. 8 R.I. Charter (1663) ......................................................................................................... 9 S.C. Const., art. VIII, § 1 (1790) .................................................................................... 9 MISCELLANEOUS William Booth, Boris Johnson Says British Coronavirus Variant May Be More Deadly, Wash. Post (Jan. 22, 2021), https://wapo.st/2Mq23iM ........................................................................................ 15 Blueprint for a Safer Economy, COVID19.CA.GOV (updated Jan. 27, 2021), https://bit.ly/2NFGFH1 ............................................................................... 13 Gerard V. Bradley, Beguiled: Free Exercise Exemptions and the Siren Song of Liberalism, 20 Hofstra L. Rev. 245 (1991) ............................................... 10 Stefanie Dazio, In Ambulances, an Unseen, Unwelcome Passenger: COVID-19, AP (Jan. 25, 2021), https://bit.ly/3sZCiqw .......................................... 15 Carl H. Esbeck, Protestant Dissent and the Virginia Disestablishment, 1776–1786, 7 Geo. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 51 (2009) ........................................................ 5 Matt Gutman et al., With LA Hospitals Overwhelmed by COVID-19, EMS Told Not to Transport Certain Patients, ABC News (Jan. 5, 2021), https://abcn.ws/39dKhqS .............................................................. 15 Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom (1779), https://bit.ly/2JShvmT .............................................................................................. 7 Letter from George Washington to the Society of Quakers (Oct. 1789), https://bit.ly/3lQjkxG ................................................................................................ 7 iv