22
posted ago by txladyvoter ago by txladyvoter +22 / -0

In the dissenting opinion, Roberts explained why the court's liberals opposed the decision.

“Numerical capacity limits of 10 and 25 people, depending on the applicable zone, do seem unduly restrictive,” Roberts wrote, according to the Times. “It is not necessary, however, for us to rule on that serious and difficult question at this time.”

“The governor might reinstate the restrictions,” he continued. “But he also might not. And it is a significant matter to override determinations made by public health officials concerning what is necessary for public safety in the midst of a deadly pandemic. If the governor does reinstate the numerical restrictions the applicants can return to this court, and we could act quickly on their renewed applications.”

Comments (10)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
2
fjobb 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's retarded. They obviously wanted to enact this "law", so sort it out as if it was. Why even leave it in their mind that maybe they'll do it later? Why would you waste the time already invested to get the case to the SC, by letting them just pull the bullshit law when they see that they might lose in the SC?