Read on Twitter
The impact of #SCOTUS's Catholic Diocese decision will extend far beyond pandemic response & it will most likely prompt (even more) state & local officials to take a completely hands-off approach toward houses of worship & religious gatherings in this pandemic & the next one, BUT
There's another path state & local governments could take under Catholic Diocese if religious gatherings/houses of worship are contributing to spread (for COVID, or a future pandemic)...
Typical religious worship services bear all the hallmarks of a high-risk setting for COVID & could certainly pose similar risks in a future pandemic...
Congregants tend to gather indoors w/ people from multiple households, talking & singing for an hour+. To withstand scrutiny, emergency orders should describe the gatherings to which they apply in terms that are tailored to these risks, rather than specifying locations.
State & local govts should issue new orders defining gatherings as "groups of people that remain together for extended periods of time in close proximity" and excluding "spontaneous collections of individuals who share a space at any given moment in time."
This definition would higher-risk (ie traditional) worship services, while exempting lower-risk (ie alternative) services like drive through/walk through services, which many places of worship have adopted throughout the pandemic.
State & local governments could also impose uniform capacity-based limits on all indoor spaces open to the public (e.g. 25%, 30% 50% of fire code or square-footage based limits) - whether essential or not.
Lower capacity limits for essential businesses may be politically difficult for officials to impose, especially given the lack of financial support for businesses/workers from Congress.
I've been thinking a lot about whether MI & WI could make this work, given they've had to switch to using specific statutory authority to regulate gatherings to impose any kind of restrictions on businesses.
Here's the backstory on the MI & WI dilemma: https://twitter.com/ProfLWiley/status/1327296164820111360?s=20
There may be a path for WI & MI to define two subtypes of gatherings: "sustained" and "transitory" and impose distinct restrictions on each. This would definitely be more vulnerable to legal challenge, but the whole situation in WI & MI is pretty vulnerable, so...
