In the wee hours of Thanksgiving morning, Seth MacFarlane, creator of the TV series “Family Guy” and “The Orville,” criticized Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch for his decision in the court case favoring religious liberty and deciding against New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s restrictions on religious services.
MacFarlane, who received a bachelor of Fine Arts degree from Rhode Island School of Design, lashed out at Gorsuch, who gained his law degree from Harvard University before he received a PhD in Law from the University of Oxford, tweeting, “Gorsuch, if you can’t make the distinction between the risk level of a small business like a liquor store and massive indoor gathering like a church with regard to a raging pandemic, you are more scientifically illiterate than the man who appointed you.”
Gorsuch, if you can’t make the distinction between the risk level of a small business like a liquor store and massive indoor gathering like a church with regard to a raging pandemic, you are more scientifically illiterate than the man who appointed you.https://t.co/M5VRT1xL8N
— Seth MacFarlane (@SethMacFarlane) November 26, 2020
Gorsuch wrote in his concurring opinion:
It turns out the businesses the Governor considers essential include hardware stores, acupuncturists, and liquor stores. Bicycle repair shops, certain signage companies, accountants, lawyers, and insurance agents are all essential too. So, at least according to the Governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine, shop for a new bike, or spend the afternoon exploring your distal points and meridians. Who knew public health would so perfectly align with secular convenience?
The Court explained in its decision:
In a red zone, while a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as “essential” may admit as many people as they wish. And the list of “essential” businesses includes things such as acupuncture facilities, camp grounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.
The Court continued:
Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest, but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as “narrowly tailored.” They are far more restrictive than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court, much tighter than those adopted by many other jurisdictions hard-hit by the pandemic, and far more severe than has been shown to be required to prevent the spread of the virus at the applicants’ services.
Some, including George Mason University law professor David Bernstein, suggested MacFarlane should stick to his day job.
Bernstein replied: “Read the opinion, not the Times. ‘While a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as essential may admit as many people as they wish.’ Plaintiff congregations ‘have operated at 25% or 33% capacity for months without a single outbreak.’ And read Breyer and Roberts’ dissents, focused on the injunction issue. Neither concluded that New York’s regulations would past ultimately constitutional muster. If the case were as easy as Seth and others suggest, they would have reached the issue.”
And read Breyer and Roberts' dissents, focused on the injunction issue. Neither concluded that New York's regulations would past ultimately constitutional muster. If the case were as easy as Seth and others suggest, they would have reached the issue.
— David Bernstein (@ProfDBernstein) November 27, 2020
Educator Joel Petlin also sided with Gorsuch et al: “You missed the point Seth. NY capped Church occupancy at 10 worshippers, despite ability to hold 1000 people. Stores were capped at 50% of capacity. Why treat religious institutions worse than Walmart. This isn’t about science, it’s about discrimination. That’s unconstitutional.”
You missed the point Seth. NY capped Church occupancy at 10 worshippers, despite ability to hold 1000 people. Stores were capped at 50% of capacity. Why treat religious institutions worse than Walmart. This isn't about science, it's about discrimination. That's unconstitutional.
— Joel M. Petlin (@Joelmpetlin) November 27, 2020
Others were more succinct in their response:
Love when court jesters want to engage in a battle of wits with Constitutional scholars. https://t.co/KobRypMvXQ
— Tweeting Indiscriminately (@mgcat) November 27, 2020