In late 2020, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, a case that challenged New York state’s COVID-19 restrictions on attendance at houses of worship. The decision, which occurred shortly after Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the bench, resulted in a shift in how the Court evaluates religious exemptions from generally applicable state laws.

The core of the legal dispute involved whether state-mandated capacity limits on religious gatherings violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The Court’s decision effectively heightened the level of scrutiny applied to such restrictions, making it more difficult for states to enforce public health mandates that disproportionately impacted religious institutions compared to secular businesses.

While the ruling is viewed by some legal analysts as a fundamental change in the Court’s religious liberty doctrine, others interpret it as a necessary protection of constitutional rights during an emergency. The decision set a precedent that has influenced subsequent litigation regarding the balance between government public health authority and individual religious practice. The case remains a focal point for debates over the influence of the Court's current conservative majority on constitutional interpretation.