## Facts

- New Mexico’s Secretary of Health issued COVID-19 Public Health Emergency Orders (PHOs) restricting “mass gatherings,” generally defined as gatherings of five or more people in a single room or connected space.
- Earlier PHOs exempted places of worship from the numerical gathering limit while encouraging remote services.
- On April 11, 2020 (the day before Easter), a new PHO removed the exemption and required places of worship to comply with the five-person limit.
- Legacy Church, a large church with a sanctuary seating roughly 3,000, asserted that in-person worship was central to its religious exercise, though it also had television, radio, and internet broadcasting capacity.
- Legacy sued the Secretary (official capacity) and the State and sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the April 11 PHO against in-person worship services.

## Issues

1. Whether Legacy Church showed a substantial likelihood of success that the PHO’s five-person limit on in-person worship violated the Free Exercise Clause.
2. Whether Legacy Church showed a substantial likelihood of success that the PHO violated the First Amendment right of peaceable assembly.
3. Whether the remaining preliminary-injunction factors (irreparable harm, balance of harms, and public interest) favored enjoining enforcement during a public health emergency.

## Decision

- The court denied the request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
- The court held Legacy was not likely to succeed on its Free Exercise claim because the PHO was neutral and generally applicable and satisfied rational-basis review.
- The court held Legacy was not likely to succeed on its assembly claim because the PHO was a content-neutral time, place, and manner restriction that was narrowly tailored to a compelling public-health interest and left open alternatives.
- The court concluded the balance of harms and public interest favored the State given the risk of increased transmission, strain on healthcare resources, and potential loss of life.

## Legal Principles

- Preliminary injunctive relief requires showing: (1) likelihood of success on the merits, (2) irreparable injury, (3) balance of harms in the movant’s favor, and (4) consistency with the public interest.
- Under *Employment Division v. Smith*, neutral and generally applicable laws that incidentally burden religious exercise are ordinarily reviewed under rational-basis scrutiny rather than strict scrutiny.
- In a public health emergency, courts give substantial deference to reasonable health regulations that bear a real and substantial relation to protecting public health and are not a plain, palpable invasion of constitutional rights.
- A content-neutral limit on the size of gatherings may be analyzed as a time, place, and manner restriction and upheld if it serves a significant or compelling government interest, is narrowly tailored, and leaves open ample alternative channels.

## Conclusion

The court declined to enjoin enforcement of New Mexico’s five-person cap on in-person worship during the early COVID-19 emergency, finding the restriction likely constitutional under Free Exercise and assembly doctrines and concluding that public-health risks and the public interest weighed against emergency relief.


Legacy Church, Inc. v. Kunkel, 455 F. Supp. 3d 1100 (D.N.M. 2020)