WASHINGTON – A college football coach asked a federal appeals court late yesterday to hold Washington State University (WSU) accountable for firing him over his request for a religious exemption from the state’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate. In Rolovich v. Washington State University, Coach Nick Rolovich, former head coach of the WSU Cougars, requested a religious exemption from Washington’s vaccine mandate, which was permitted by the state’s rules. In response, WSU denigrated his beliefs and fired him rather than accommodate his beliefs. The firing was part of a premeditated effort by university officials to push Rolovich out over his religious convictions about the vaccine. After a lower court declined to hold WSU accountable, Rolovich and Becket have appealed to the Ninth Circuit. 

Nick Rolovich, a practicing Catholic, served as head coach of the WSU Cougars for nearly two seasons, where he earned respect for his leadership, work ethic, and commitment to his players both on and off the field. In August 2021, following a statewide COVID-19 vaccine mandate for public employees, Rolovich discerned that taking the vaccine would violate his conscience as guided by his faith. Citing prayer, personal study, advice from a priest, and Catholic teachings on therapeutic proportionality and complicity with abortion, Rolovich concluded he could not in good conscience receive the vaccine. He submitted a formal request for a religious exemption to the mandate in accordance with university policy. 

“I gave my blood, sweat, and tears to WSU, only for the administration to fire me for my faith,” said Nick Rolovich, senior offensive assistant coach at the University of California at Berkeley. “I wasn’t looking for a fight—I just asked to live out my beliefs. I hope the court will ensure that no coach or player can be forced to choose between their faith and the game they love.” 

Although a university review panel determined that Rolovich’s religious beliefs were genuine and initially approved the exemption, WSU leadership intervened to reverse the decision. Internal communications revealed a coordinated plan—referred to privately by WSU officials as the “Rolo strategy”—to ensure that Rolovich’s requested religious exemption would be denied. Despite proposed accommodations from WSU’s health and safety staff, the university fired Rolovich in violation of his contract in 2021, citing opposition from donors and supposed harms to WSU’s “brand.” In 2022, Rolovich filed a lawsuit against WSU leadership to hold it accountable for firing him over his religious beliefs. Earlier this year, a federal district court in Washington ruled against Rolovich. With Becket’s help, Rolovich appealed his case to the Ninth Circuit.

“Washington State sacked its own coach for standing firm in his faith,” said Joseph Davis, senior counsel at Becket. “In America, you have to accommodate religion—not target it just because some on the sidelines complain. The Ninth Circuit should hold Washington State accountable for what it did—and uphold Coach Rolovich’s and every American’s right to stay true to their faith on the job.”

A hearing in the case is expected later this year or early next. Rolovich is also represented by Eric N. Kniffin of Kniffin Law PLLC and Eric J. Seese of Frost Brown Todd LLP.  

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at [email protected] or 202-349-7219.   

Photo Credit: Darryl Oumi via Getty Images 

WASHINGTON – A federal district court judge just issued an order blocking Governor Cuomo’s discriminatory limits on Orthodox Jewish synagogues permanently after Cuomo—in a peculiar move—asked the judge to rule against him and end the restrictions. The judge’s order applies to all of the houses of worship in red and orange “zones” in New York, and is one of the first in the country to block percentage-of-occupancy limits on worship attendance.

The decision comes after the Supreme Court found his 10- and 25-person caps on synagogues were discriminatory, other lower courts also ruled against him, and just days ago, a New York Times exposé revealed that nine top New York State health officials resigned after Cuomo told doctors to make up scientific justifications for his COVID lockdown orders. Cuomo’s retreat—which covered not only the 10- and 25-person caps but also the 25 percent and 33 percent occupancy limits—also came as he faced the prospect of Dr. Howard Zucker, New York’s commissioner of health, having to testify on the witness stand.

The judge’s decision to grant Cuomo’s request to end his own restrictions caps a series of unfortunate events for the Governor. In November, the Supreme Court ruled against his restrictions, saying, “even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten. The restrictions at issue here, by effectively barring many from attending religious services, strike at the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty.” The Justices also emphasized that “there is no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID-19,” and, to the contrary, that they “have admirable safety records.”

“It’s not every day you see a Governor beg a federal district court ‘Stop me before I discriminate again!’ but that is exactly what Governor Cuomo asked for,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “The Governor is desperately trying to avoid testimony showing that his orders shutting down synagogues and churches weren’t based on public health, but on politics. The court’s order is good news for the synagogues, churches, and other houses of worship of New York.”

Agudath Israel of America, a 98-year-old Orthodox Jewish umbrella group headquartered in New York City, succeeded in its first-ever lawsuit to go to the Supreme Court. Becket and law firm Troutman Pepper asked the Supreme Court for emergency protection on behalf of Agudath Israel and affiliated synagogues as part of an ongoing lawsuit against Governor Cuomo’s restrictions on their right to worship. The Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn brought a parallel case challenging the restrictions, and the cases were decided together by the Supreme Court.

When the case returned to the district court level, the New York Times reported that nine top health officials resigned after Cuomo allegedly announced major changes to pandemic policy without consulting with them first. After Cuomo’s press conferences, he apparently asked New York health officials to match their policy documents with his announcements. One of the major changes the health officials were reportedly blindsided by were rules related to the “cluster initiative” that shut down houses of worship throughout Brooklyn.

“We welcome Governor Cuomo’s surrender, even if it took him way too long to figure out he was acting illegally,” said Rassbach. “And we hope he learned something along the way. If he writes another COVID book, maybe he can give it the title I Did It My Way—And Boy Was I Wrong!”

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at [email protected] or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

WASHINGTON – Late last night the Supreme Court issued an injunction stopping California’s extreme COVID-19 ban on indoor worship in churches, synagogues, and other houses of worship. The Court ruled in two cases, South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom and Harvest Rock Church v. Newsom. Both churches sued California Governor Gavin Newsom, challenging the state’s total ban on indoor worship services—the most extreme in the nation—which targeted churches for closure while allowing non-essential retail stores such as Macy’s to open to hundreds of customers, as well as hair salons, nail salons, and Hollywood soundstages.  

The Justices wrote several opinions in addition to the Court’s order. Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justices Thomas and Alito, cited Becket’s friend-of-the-court brief, pointing out that California was the only state in the country with a complete ban on indoor worship. Justice Gorsuch also stated that “California no longer asks its movie studios, malls, and manicurists to wait.” “As this crisis enters its second year—and hovers over a second Lent, a second Passover, and a second Ramadan—it is too late for the State to defend extreme measures with claims of temporary exigency, if it ever could. Drafting narrowly tailored regulations can be difficult. But if Hollywood may host a studio audience or film a singing competition while not a single soul may enter California’s churches, synagogues, and mosques, something has gone seriously awry.” 

For his part, Chief Justice Roberts wrote that “the State’s present determination—that the maximum number of adherents who can safely worship in the most cavernous cathedral is zero—appears to reflect not expertise or discretion, but instead insufficient appreciation or consideration of the interests at stake.” He went on to state that the Constitution “entrusts the protection of the people’s rights to the Judiciary—not despite judges being shielded by life tenure, … but because they are. Deference, though broad, has its limits.” 

“California had no right to declare itself a religion-free zone,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “When every other state in the country has figured out a way to both allow worship and protect the public health, maybe you are doing it wrong. We are glad this extreme violation of our first freedom has finally come to an end.” 

Previously, some states imposed numerical caps on indoor worship, regardless of the size of the house of worship, while allowing businesses to open to a percentage of their capacity. On the night before Thanksgiving 2020, the Supreme Court struck down New York Governor Cuomo’s 10- and 25-person caps on religious worship in Becket’s previous case, Agudath Israel of America v. Cuomo—the first successful challenge of COVID-19 policies that unconstitutionally prioritize secular behavior over religious exercise. The Supreme Court’s decision today found California’s policies in violation of precedent set in Agudath Israel and its companion case, Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo.  

“When it comes to First Amendment rights, courts should not rubber-stamp public health restrictions,” added Rassbach. “That is especially so as we near the one-year anniversary of the lockdown orders. Instead courts should carefully balance the right to worship and public health.” 

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

WASHINGTON – Just before midnight on the eve of Thanksgiving the Supreme Court stopped Governor Cuomo from imposing discriminatory 10- and 25-person caps on synagogues and churches. The Court agreed that the Governor’s “rules can be viewed as targeting the ‘ultra-Orthodox [Jewish] community,’” and violate the First Amendment by treating religious exercise worse than secular activities. 

In its opinion the Supreme Court said that, “…even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten. The restrictions at issue here, by effectively barring many from attending religious services, strike at the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty.” The Justices also emphasized that “there is no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID-19,” and, to the contrary, that they “have admirable safety records.” Moreover, the Court explained that “there are many other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services,” including tying maximum attendance to the size of a synagogue or church. 

Agudath Israel of America, a 98-year-old Orthodox Jewish umbrella group headquartered in New York City, succeeded in its first-ever lawsuit to go to the Supreme Court. Becket and Trouman Pepper asked the Supreme Court for emergency protection on behalf of Agudath Israel and affiliated synagogues as part of an ongoing lawsuit against Governor Cuomo’s restrictions on their right to worship – which were abruptly declared just 48 hours before a trio of sacred Jewish holidays, Hoshanah Rabbah, Shmini Atzeres, and Simchas Torah. The Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn brought a parallel case challenging the restrictions.  

“Governor Cuomo should have known that openly targeting Jews for a special COVID crackdown was never going to be constitutional,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket and counsel to the plaintiffs. “But treating synagogues and churches worse than the pet stores, liquor stores, and department stores also just didn’t make any sense, particularly when Agudath synagogues and Brooklyn parishes have carefully and responsibly followed the rules. The Supreme Court was right to step in and allow Jews and Catholics to worship as they have for centuries.”  

New York had tried to avoid a Supreme Court ruling by changing its classifications while the application was pending at the Supreme Court. But the Justices rejected that cat-and-mouse game, finding that houses of worship “remain under a constant threat” that the Governor would reclassify them and “there may not be time for applicants to seek and obtain relief from this Court before another Sabbath passes.” 

The dissenting justices argued that the Court did not need to decide the issue now because of New York’s recent rule change. Even these justices, however, emphasized the importance of protecting religious liberty during a pandemic. For example, Chief Justice Roberts noted that the restrictions “do seem unduly restrictive” and “may well … violate the Free Exercise Clause.” Justices Sotomayor and Kagan agreed that “Free religious exercise is one of our most treasured and jealously guarded constitutional rights” and that “States may not discriminate against religious worship” even in times of crisis. 

The injunctions issued by the Court will remain in place while the appeal continues at the Second Circuit and the Supreme Court. 

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. 

WASHINGTON – Two foster mothers, Sharonell Fulton and Toni Simms-Busch, asked the Supreme Court today to protect their freedom to partner with a Catholic ministry to care for foster children in need. During oral argument, the Justices appeared poised to protect the women and their ability to work with Catholic Social Services, which pioneered foster care in Philadelphia over 200 years ago.  

“My faith has led me to become a foster mother to children that society had abused and discarded,” said foster mom and named plaintiff, Sharonell Fulton. “As a single woman of color, I’ve learned a thing or two about discrimination over the years—but I’ve never experienced the vindictive religious discrimination the City’s politicians have expressed toward my faith.” 

“I’m grateful the Justices took our arguments seriously and seemed to understand that foster parents like me just want to provide loving homes for children,” said Toni Simms-Busch, also a foster mom and named plaintiff. “It does not help anyone for the City to shut down the best foster-care ministry in Philadelphia—particularly when we have loving homes ready for children in need.”  

In Sharonell Fulton et. al. v. City of Philadelphia, the City of Philadelphia told Catholic Social Services that it had to either change its religious practices or close down, preventing kids from being placed with loving foster families. Becket Senior Counsel Lori Windham argued on behalf of Sharonell, Toni, and Catholic Social Services, telling the Court that the First Amendment protects the right of religious organizations to serve those in need without giving up the religious beliefs that motivate their ministry. 

“Religious organizations should be free to serve the public, regardless of their beliefs. The public square is big enough to accommodate everyone who wishes to do good – and that should be especially true when it comes to taking care of children in need,” said Lori Windham, senior counsel at Becket and arguing attorney in Fulton. 

During oral argument, a majority of the Justices appeared inclined to protect the religious foster parents and Catholic Social Services:  

• Justice Kavanaugh called the City’s position “absolutist and extreme,” noting that Philadelphia “created this clash,” even though “no same-sex couple has ever come to Catholic Social Services for participation in this program.”  
• Justice Breyer said what is “bothering me a lot” about the case is that “that no family has ever been turned down by this agency—indeed has never applied,” but the City still tried to shut them down. 
• Justice Kagan pressed the City on the Free Exercise Clause, saying “I read Smith and Lukumi that you can’t get out of it so easily—that as long as there is an exemption, as long as it exists, as long as you could rely on it in the future, that there is not neutrality here.” 
• Justice Gorsuch expressed concern that the City could “effectively take over a service that had been provided privately for some time, and take it over so much so that it regulates it pervasively and this [Free Exercise] analysis shouldn’t apply at all.”  
• Justice Alito said, “If we are honest about what’s really going on here, it’s not about ensuring that same-sex couples in Philadelphia have the opportunity to be foster parents. It’s the fact the City can’t stand the message that Catholic Social Services and the Archdiocese are sending by continuing to adhere to the old-fashioned view about marriage.” 
• As the federal government’s attorney, Hashim Mooppan put it, “What the City has done is worse than cutting off its nose to spite its face. What it is doing is cutting off homes from the most vulnerable children in the city to spite the Catholic Church.” 

A decision from the Court is expected by the end of June. 

Becket will hold a press call today at 12:30 PM EST 
featuring Foster mom Toni Simms-Busch and Becket Fund senior counsel Lori Windham who will deliver remarks and answer questions about the case, respectively.  

Call-in information: 
301-715-8592 | Pin #: 914-1188-8332| or join https://zoom.us/j/91411888332
 Email questions in advance to [email protected] 

WASHINGTON – Just hours after being ordered by a federal judge to explain his shutdown of Jewish schools in court, Governor Andrew Cuomo held a press conference in which he reversed course and agreed to allow the schools to open in Far Rockaway. The announcement came on the heels of the lawsuit filed by Yitzchok and Chana Lebovits, who send their daughters to Bais Yaakov Ateres Miriam (BYAM) – an Orthodox Jewish school for girls. The lawsuit alleged that Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio had illegally discriminated against the school, even though there had been no cases of COVID and both officials had previously admitted that schools have not been spreading the virus. 

“We are grateful the lockdown order has been loosened and our children can get back to praying and learning together with their classmates,” said Chana Lebovits, mother of two Bais Yaakov students. “The Governor should never have targeted the Jewish community with his lockdown or his statements.”  

“It’s unfortunate it took a lawsuit to bring us to this point, but we are grateful the Governor has heard our plea and taken action to loosen the restrictions on Far Rockaway,” said Rabbi Nosson Neuman, menahel of Bais Yakkov. “At the end of the day, this is about the children, and getting our children and those of the entire community back into the classroom in a safe and legal way is the only goal.”

In Lebovits v. Cuomo, with help from Becket and the Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty, Yitzchok and Chana asked the court to punish Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio for their unscientific and discriminatory targeting of the Orthodox Jewish community that has caused immense suffering and pain for their neighbors and for their children who will never get back the weeks of instruction stripped from them at BYAM.  Among other things, the lawsuit emphasized a recording of a conversation Governor Cuomo had with a group of rabbis in which he acknowledged that the policy was not tailored, was cut by a “hatchet,” and was driven by fear. 

The Governor’s policy—announced October 6—was set to continue until at least November 5. Yet hours after being ordered to justify his actions in this lawsuit, Governor Cuomo reversed course. He announced today that he is loosening a lockdown order on Jewish communities in Far Rockaway imposed earlier this month after several groups within the targeted lockdown zones took him to court. In early October following rates of COVID cases that Governor Cuomo admitted “would be a safe zone” in many other states, the State imposed new indefinite lockdowns on a select number of zip codes in New York that target the Orthodox Jewish community. The new restrictions completely banned in-person instruction at BYAM and other schools in Jewish neighborhoods in New York City—stripping parents of their right to direct the religious education and upbringing of their children. 

“The Governor shouldn’t have needed a lawsuit to tell him that shutting down Jewish schools was wrong. This was the worst kind of unscientific and harmful scapegoating, as the Governor himself knew that schools weren’t a problem,” said Mark Rienzi, President of Becket and counsel to the plaintiffs. “If Governor Cuomo wants respect, he has to give respect. Reopening the schools in Far Rockaway is a start, but elected officials have a lot of work to do to repair the pain and division they have caused.”  

Beginning in March, BYAM voluntarily transitioned to remote learning to protect its neighbors and in compliance with the law. In the months that followed, the school spent thousands of dollars equipping teachers with the resources they needed to effectively teach over Zoom. Nevertheless, remote learning proved to be a poor substitute for in-person instruction. Students have suffered academically. Teachers have reported alarming regression in reading skills, had to reteach prayers, and are requesting last year’s math textbooks. Since reopening, BYAM has followed rigorous health and safety protocol, including masking, social distancing, and daily temperature checks—the result of which has been zero COVID cases in the school.  

Since its founding in 2012 BYAM has worked to instill the value and tradition of Orthodox Judaism in the next generation of women. Religious education is a centuries-old tradition that is indispensable to practicing the Jewish faith and passing it on to the next generation. Communal prayer, participating in bible studies and engaging in group projects designed to instill ethical values are all just some of the vital activities BYAM provides for its girls. The selective lockdown has cost the girls weeks of instruction they won’t be able to get back.  

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. 

WASHINGTON – Yitzchok and Chana Lebovits, who send their daughters to Bais Yaakov Ateres Miriam (BYAM) – an Orthodox Jewish school for girls– are taking New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City’s Mayor Bill de Blasio to court today over new COVID restrictions intended to close religious schools in Orthodox Jewish communities. In Lebovits v. Cuomo, with help from Becket and the Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty, Yitzchok and Chana are asking the court to end Cuomo’s unscientific and discriminatory targeting of the Orthodox Jewish community and allow their children to get back to the classroom.

On October 6, following an increase in COVID-19 cases that Governor Cuomo admitted “would be a safe zone” in many other states, the state imposed new indefinite lockdowns on a select number of zip codes in New York that target the Orthodox Jewish community. The new restrictions have completely banned in-person instruction at BYAM and other schools in Jewish neighborhoods in New York City—stripping parents of their right to direct the religious education and upbringing of their children. The restrictions come after months of Cuomo and de Blasio scapegoating the Jewish community for the spread of COVID while praising nearby mass protests. Last week, a federal judge in New York found the new restrictions to be specifically targeting the Orthodox Jewish community.

“We are devastated for our daughters and their classmates who are needlessly suffering because of the Governor’s policy,” said Chana Lebovits, mother of two Bais Yaakov students. “Governor Cuomo should not take away part of my daughters’ childhood because other people are afraid of Orthodox Jews. We hope the court will let our daughters go back to school so they can pray and learn together with their classmates.”

Beginning in March, BYAM voluntarily transitioned to remote learning to protect its neighbors and in compliance with the law. In the months that followed, the school spent thousands of dollars equipping teachers with the resources they needed to effectively teach over Zoom. Nevertheless, remote learning proved to be a poor substitute for in-person instruction. Students have suffered academically. Teachers have reported alarming regression in reading skills, had to reteach prayers, and are requesting last year’s math textbooks. Since reopening, BYAM has followed rigorous health and safety protocol, including masking, social distancing, and daily temperature checks—the result of which has been zero COVID cases in the school.

Since its founding in 2012 BYAM has worked to instill the value and tradition of Orthodox Judaism in the next generation of women. Religious education is a centuries-old tradition that is indispensable to practicing the Jewish faith and passing it on to the next generation. Communal prayer, participating in bible studies and engaging in group projects designed to instill ethical values are all just some of the vital activities BYAM provides for its girls. These opportunities simply can’t be fulfilled through telelearning and the new lockdown orders threaten the vitality of BYAM’s traditions and the religious messages they convey in the lives of the girls that attend.

“There is no place for bigotry in the Big Apple,” said Mark Rienzi, president and senior counsel at Becket. “By Cuomo’s own admission, schools are not significant spreaders of COVID-19, and the new policy was not driven by science but was made from ‘fear’—fear of Orthodox Jews. Cuomo and de Blasio need to follow the science, follow the law, and stop scapegoating Jews. The Mayor and the Governor should be ashamed.”

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at [email protected] or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

WASHINGTON –The Public Health Department for the City of Madison and Dane County, Wisconsin put out a new “Forward Dane” order today, removing a 50-person cap on in-person religious services that did not apply to any similar secular activities. The new order came after the Roman Catholic Diocese of Madison stood up for its right to free exercise of religion. Global law firms Sidley Austin and Troutman Sanders, along with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty sent a letter to Dane County Executive Joe Parisi, Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway, and Public Health Director Janel Heinrich on Wednesday, June 3. The letter explained that Madison/Dane County’s arbitrary 50-person cap on houses of worship violated the First Amendment as well as the Wisconsin Constitution. Because the Diocese stood up for its rights, Catholic churches in Madison/Dane County will now conduct in-person Masses at the same 25 percent capacity level as secular activities such as malls and theaters, but with even more rigorous social distancing and hygiene protocols.

Under Madison/Dane County’s previous order, shopping malls, bars, restaurants, spas, gyms, salons, museums, movie theaters, community centers, bowling alleys, skating rinks, and trampoline parks were allowed to open at 25 percent capacity, while houses of worship were subject to an arbitrary 50-person cap regardless of how large the church building was. This meant that in some cases, Catholic churches in Madison were held to less than five percent capacity. Madison’s mayor also announced that public protests were not subject to government restrictions at all. The legal letter sent on Wednesday explained that capping in-person worship at just 50 people was discriminatory and targeted the Catholic Church for selective enforcement.

“We are pleased that the County and the City have ended the unequal 50-person cap on religious gatherings. As bishop, it is my duty to ensure that Sunday Mass be available as widely as possible to the Catholic faithful, while following best practices when it comes to public health,” said Bishop Donald Hying, Roman Catholic Diocese of Madison. “Indeed, in a time of deep division, it is more important than ever for the Church to provide solace and comfort to all, in the great tradition of American religious freedom. We look forward to working together with the County and City to continue the reopening process in a safe, cooperative, and responsible manner.”

After Madison-Dane County officials released the first “Forward Dane” executive order on May 18 which listed houses of worship as “essential services” thus allowing them to resume in-person services at 25 percent capacity, the Diocese of Madison quickly put together a plan for safely reopening with rigorous social distancing and hygiene protocols developed in accordance with CDC and WHO guidelines. But after the Diocese announced its careful plan, the City of Madison/Dane County abruptly reversed course, adding a brand-new restriction on houses of worship, limiting them to just 50 people at each religious service regardless of the size of the building. Following its May 22 order, the Madison/Dane County Health Department multiple times called and visited Diocesan officials and parishes to inform them that surveillance officials would be sent to churches and fines of up to $1000 would be imposed for every instance in which more than 50 people were gathered for Mass.

“We’re glad that Madison and Dane County came to their senses, but it shouldn’t have taken so long,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “The First Amendment protects both prayer and protest. Putting an arbitrary numerical cap on worship services while allowing thousands to protest makes no sense from a legal or public health perspective. Most other governments nationwide have already lifted their COVID-related restrictions on worship. The few remaining holdouts should take note and come into compliance with the First Amendment.”

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at [email protected] or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

WASHINGTON –Global law firms Sidley Austin and Troutman Sanders, along with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, sent a letter today to Dane County Executive Joe Parisi and Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway on behalf of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Madison explaining that the City and County’s May 22 public health order that capped in-person worship at just 50 people is discriminatory and targets the Catholic Church for selective enforcement. Under the order, shopping malls, bars, restaurants, spas, gyms, salons, museums, movie theaters, community centers, bowling alleys, skating rinks, trampoline parks and more are not subject to the 50-person cap. Madison’s mayor has also announced that public protests are not subject to government restrictions at all. Madison/Dane County threatened to send government officials to Catholic Masses to find out how many people are there and impose $1000 fines if too many people came to church. The letter explains that Madison/Dane County’s actions violate the First Amendment and the Wisconsin Constitution.

After Madison/Dane County officials released the “Forward Dane” executive order on May 18 which listed houses of worship as “essential services” thus allowing them to resume in-person services at 25 percent capacity, the Diocese of Madison quickly put together a plan for safely reopening with rigorous social distancing and hygiene protocols developed in accordance with CDC and WHO guidelines. But after the Diocese announced its careful plan, in an abrupt and inexplicable reversal, the City of Madison/Dane County added a brand-new restriction on houses of worship, limiting them to just 50 people at each religious service regardless of the size of the building. This means that some churches are held to while trampoline parks, movie theaters and virtually all other entities can operate to at least 25%.

“In the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and the racial injustice of the past week, our community is crying out for unity, for grace and for spiritual healing. We are ready and able to answer that call, but the 50-person cap has unjustly stifled our pastoral mission,” said Bishop Donald Hying, Roman Catholic Diocese of Madison. “Our Diocese has been, and remains, committed to promoting and protecting the health and safety of our fellow Madisonians, but the county and city have wrongly subordinated the spiritual needs of the community to the operations of non-essential businesses.”

Since May 22, the Madison/Dane County Health Department has multiple times called and visited Diocesan officials and parishes to inform them that surveillance teams would be sent to churches and fines of up to $1000 would be imposed for every instance in which more than 50 people were gathered for Mass.

“Madison and Dane County think mass protests, movies and malls are just fine, but churches have to be put under surveillance to make sure not too many people go,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “If it’s safe enough for thousands to shop together at malls, and to sit in a theatre for a two-hour film, it’s safe enough to spend 45 minutes safely socially distanced in worship. Madison and Dane County should end their unequal treatment of religious people.”

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at [email protected] or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.