From New York Times, I'm Michael Vabaro. This is a Daily.

Today, in a new ruling, the Supreme Court has given religious Americans their latest victory

against government rules that the court says in fringe, unreligious freedom. But as legal

victories accumulate for the religious, the question has become whether the Supreme Court's

majority is protecting the rights of the faithful or giving them preference.

I spoke with my colleague, Supreme Court reporter Adam Lipdack.

It's Wednesday, April 14th.

Adam, tell me about the Supreme Court ruling that was handed down a few days ago.

So it's Friday night. It's about 11, 30 at night. I'm just about to go to bed and I get a call

from the public information office at the court that the court has just handed down a ruling,

which is I'd like to say it's unusual, but it's happening more and more these late night,

Friday night rulings. And the court says that by a five to four vote,

it's lifted restrictions imposed by California on religious services held in private homes.

Mm-hmm. And explain that decision and the case that led to it.

Well, California has a bunch of COVID restrictions meant to thwart the spread of the pandemic.

One of them limits private gatherings in private homes to know more than three households.

A couple of people who wanted to hold Bible study groups and prayer meetings in their

private homes for more than three households challenge this restriction, saying it violates their

constitutional right to the free exercise of religion. And when they say free exercise,

what they mean is the constitutional protection in the First Amendment that prohibits the government

from interfering with the free exercise of religion with the ability of people to pursue their

religious beliefs and practices. And the court agrees. And what was the court's reasoning in letting

...