Do you remember when I told you they were going to go completely nuts with color coded alerts, and section off different parts of cities using these codes in order to keep people in a constant state of fear and confusion?

Following Britain, New York has now gone all in on color codes, as I said they would. It is really cartoonish, frankly.

If Joe Biden is allowed to become president, he will introduce a national system of color codes.

Fox 5:

With high-risk businesses closed indefinitely on southern Staten Island as of Wednesday, Mayor Bill de Blasio is warning of more ‘substantial’ COVID restrictions citywide in the days to come.

All of the south shore of Staten Island is now in an orange zone of restrictions forcing the closures of gyms, salons, and indoor dining. Outdoor dining is allowed, but indoor and outdoor gatherings must be capped at 10 people.

The northern part of the borough is in a yellow zone along with upper Manhattan. Indoor and outdoor dining is capped in a yellow zone at four people per table.

During a televised interview Tuesday, de Blasio said the restrictions were just the beginning.

“In the next week or two we should see some substantial restrictions,” said de Blasio. “I think indoor dining will be closed, gyms will be closed. I’m not happy about it. No one is happy about it but that’s what’s coming.”

What about the multinational corporations that are making billions of dollars from the gutting of these small businesses, Bill?

I would think they’d be happy about it, wouldn’t they?

As a simple practical matter, making billions makes people happy, doesn’t it?

I’m sure Bill’s daughter is also happy, since this is obviously primarily affecting white people, whom she hates.

He’s also doing checkpoints, which is something we’ve only seen thus far in Australia.

The good news (I guess) is that the Supreme Court has backed religious groups in the state.

It’s way kooky how basic freedom of movement has had to fall back on the First Amendment, but okay.


In a 5-4 ruling, the US Supreme Court sided with religious organizations in a dispute over Covid-19 restrictions put in place by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo limiting the number of people attending religious services.

The case is the latest pitting religious groups against city and state officials seeking to stop the spread of Covid-19, and it highlights the impact of Justice Amy Coney Barrett on the court. The decision comes as coronavirus cases surge across the country.

In the late-night decision, Barrett sided with her conservative colleagues in the dispute, while Chief Justice John Roberts joined the three liberal justices in dissent.

Last spring and summer, before the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court split 5-4 on similar cases out of California and Nevada, with Roberts and the liberals in the majority siding against houses of worship. Barrett was confirmed in October to take Ginsburg’s seat.

It’s crazy that they refuse to call Roberts one of the liberals, given his record.

It’s good that Amy Two Names is doing something useful.

But yes, the argument of Cuomo is that a church is like any other business and the argument of the court is that the church has special protections.

In court papers, lawyers for Cuomo argued that the restrictions were necessary to help stop the spread of Covid-19 and that houses of worship weren’t being treated differently than similar secular businesses. They also said that while the dispute was pending, Cuomo had already lifted any restrictions that applied to the organizations.

“Not only is there no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID-19 but there are many other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services,” the Court held.

“Members of this Court are not public health experts, and we should respect the judgment of those with special expertise and responsibility in this area,” the court said. “But even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.”

The court said that even though Cuomo had lifted some restrictions, the houses of worship “remain under a constant threat” because the restrictions could always be reinstated.

Lower courts had sided with Cuomo.

This is obviously not what’s written in the Constitution. The church is not supposed to have special protections. It is simply that their safety from this type of abuse was enumerated in the Constitution due to the fact that at the time the document was produced, there had been attempts in Europe to restrict religion beyond other establishments, by regulating the type of religion that could be practiced.

Point being: the government has no right to regulate the opening and closing patterns of any of these businesses any more than they have a right to regulate the church.

All of this stuff clearly violates the Fifth Amendment.

The Fifth says that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

That is not just for churches. All private property is protected, all liberty is protected. The government has zero right to do any of what they are doing. These emergency provisions are basically for wartime, or for a natural disaster. It’s not meant to be declared for months on end, especially not because of a virus with a 99.97% survival rate.

The fact that the Supreme Court hasn’t much more aggressively gone after all of this lunacy shows that they are not on the side of the people. One of the explicit purposes of the federal government is to protect the citizens of states from overreach by state governments.

Of course, if Joe Biden assumes the throne, this will be irrelevant, as he is going to enforce all of this tyranny on the federal level, using his Justice Department. The Supreme Court won’t say anything.

How did we allow this to happen?