“This is especially evident with respect to religious liberty,” said Alito. “It pains me to say this, but in certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right.”
Alito said this is a “surprising turn of events,” noting that in the 1990s, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was a bipartisan piece of legislation that easily was voted into law. Today, he said, “when states have considered or gone ahead and adopted their own versions of RiFRA, they have been threatened with punishing economic boycotts.”
Alito said that the cases the court hears today follow the “same trend” of eroding religious liberty.
Specifically, Alito cited the “unrelenting attack” on the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic religious order that operates nursing homes for the elderly poor. The Little Sisters of the Poor have made several trips to the Supreme Court after they refused to provide contraception and abortifacient drugs in their insurance plans, and have won each time.
“For many today, religious liberty is not a cherished freedom,” said Alito. “It's often just an excuse for bigotry, and it can't be tolerated, even when there is no evidence that anybody has been harmed.” He said there was no evidence that any of the employees working for the Little Sisters of the Poor had ever sought to receive contraception under their insurance plan.
Alito was critical of states that have restricted access to worship services under the guise of coronavirus safety protocols, but had allowed other gatherings to continue without issue.
In July, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case Calvary Chapel v. Sisolak, which argued that Nevada was discriminating against houses of worship by restricting capacity to 50 people. Casinos, however, were allowed 50% capacity. Alito voted to hear the case.
“Now, deciding whether to allow this disparate treatment should not have been a very tough call,” said Alito. “Take a quick look at the Constitution. You will see the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, which protects religious liberty. You will not find a craps clause or a blackjack clause or a slot machine clause.”
“Nevada was unable to provide any plausible justification for treating casinos more favorably than houses of worship,” he said. “But the court nevertheless deferred to the governor's judgment, which just so happened to favor the state's biggest industry and the many voters it employs.”
Alito raised concerns that freedom of speech was on its way to becoming a “second-tier Constitutional right,” and said that the court would be facing the “great challenge” in the future to protect freedom of speech.
“You can't say that marriage is the union between one man and one woman. Until very recently, that's what the vast majority of Americans thought,” said Alito. “Now it's considered bigotry.”
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
At Catholic News Agency, our team is committed to reporting the truth with courage, integrity, and fidelity to our faith. We provide news about the Church and the world, as seen through the teachings of the Catholic Church. When you subscribe to the CNA UPDATE, we'll send you a daily email with links to the news you need and, occasionally, breaking news.
As part of this free service you may receive occasional offers from us at EWTN News and EWTN. We won't rent or sell your information, and you can unsubscribe at any time.
“That this would happen after our decision in Obergefell should not have come as a surprise,” he said. While the majority opinion “included words meant to calm the fears of those who cling to traditional views on marriage,” he said that he foresaw that the decision would erode freedom of speech protections.
Alito quoted his dissent in Obergefell, where he wrote “I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes. But if they repeat those of us in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots, and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.”
“That is just what is coming to pass,” he said.