Supreme Court church ruling not enough, US judge says

A federal judge in Sacramento granted in part and denied in part a state and county government motion to dismiss a constitutional challenge filed by a Lodi church that sued after police disrupted its services during Gov. Gavin Newsom's stay-at-home orders in the spring.

Cross Culture Christian Center, represented by Dean R. Broyles, argued the Lodi police actions were religiously intolerant and discriminatory. Officers showed up at the church three times, warning the pastor he could face a citation and fines for holding church services. Cross Culture's lawsuit also names Newsom and t San Joaquin County as defendants. Cross Culture Christian Center v. Newsom, 20-CV-832 (E.D. Cal., filed April 22, 2020).

Churches across the nation have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court for reversal of such orders since the justices last month blocked Gov. Andrew Cuomo from enforcing New York's limits on the number of people who could gather together to worship. The justices in a 5-4 split found that the restrictions violated the free exercise of religion clause of the First Amendment and protections against unequal treatment, as churches were being treated differently than secular activities.

Following Tuesday's oral arguments, U.S. Judge John A. Mendez of the Eastern District of California allowed the Lodi church to continue pressing its free exercise claim, as it was the only issue squarely addressed by the Supreme Court. Mendez dismissed Cross Culture's state constitutional claims without leave to amend.

Mendez also dismissed the city of Lodi from the entire case with prejudice. He sided with Lodi's attorney, Deborah J. Fox of Meyers Nave, who argued that a handful of police contacts with Cross Culture did not rise to a custom, practice or policy that led to the church's alleged injuries, nor did the city adopt any such practices.

Mendez did allow San Joaquin County to remain as a defendant. The county not only followed Newsom's orders but also issued its own restrictions on gatherings.

Mendez also tossed out Cross Culture's federal constitutional claims for free assembly, free speech, and rights under the equal protection and establishment of religion clauses without prejudice against San Joaquin County and the state, but allowed leave to amend.

The judge advised Broyles to streamline his amended complaint. A "kitchen sink" strategy means decisions will take longer, he said.

Mendez remarked even though several churches across the nation have been challenging restrictions in light of the Brooklyn diocese case, it was too early to predict whether each and every church would succeed.

"I think you need a more definitive opinion than the U.S. Supreme Court. You need to look at each case on its facts," Mendez said. He cited a similar case pending before U.S. Judge Jesus G. Bernal in the Central District of California involving a Pasadena church. Harvest Rock Church v. Newsom, 20-CV-6414 (C.D. Cal., filed July 17, 2020).

The U.S. Supreme Court vacated Bernal's ruling in Harvest Rock in light of its decision in the Roman Catholic Diocese case out of New York. The state of California was given until Dec. 14 to file a brief, and a hearing will take place Dec. 18.

Harvest Rock would be "the driving force" in the Cross Culture case, the judge said. The Cross Culture case is "months behind the other church cases," Mendez said.

The judge also told Broyles there was scientific evidence missing that proved the restrictions on church gatherings were discriminatory, arbitrary and not narrowly tailored.

"The flipside here is, I've only seen affidavits on how risky these churches are. A congregation of 2,000 people indoors for a service on a Sunday just ... makes me shudder," Mendez remarked.

Broyles argued that a companion case out of Ukiah provided evidence that if a church followed basic precautions and social distancing measures, the risk of transmission goes to nearly zero. The World Health Organization and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention never said parties cannot meet indoors at all, Broyles said.

"As a matter of fact, they recognize the benefit religion has in people's lives and keeping people out of depression, drug use, that were exacerbated by this pandemic," Broyles said. He referenced an epidemiologist from Stanford University who said churches would be as safe as retail outlets if they follow rules on mask wearing, physical distancing and have proper ventilation.

Todd Grabarsky, a deputy California attorney general, Office, said the evidence Broyle cited has been "vehemently and unequivocally rejected as non-scientific, and as dangerous as it is radical."

Cross Culture has until Jan. 15 to amend its complaint. Responsive pleadings are due Feb. 5.