Do casinos have more freedom than churches? Five members of the U.S. Supreme Court apparently think they do! On Friday, the Court’s liberal bloc ruled against religious freedom, joined (again) by Chief Justice John Roberts.

How is such a nonsensical decision even possible? I’m not a betting man, but I assure you…someone on the high court is playing with a few cards short of a full deck!

A church in Nevada sought emergency protection from the Supreme Court because places of worship are being unfairly singled out by Nevada’s Democratic Governor Steve Sisolak. He has ordered houses of worship to maintain a 50-person limit — regardless of their size or social distancing measures — while allowing other businesses to welcome up to 50% of their fire-code capacities.

In other words, the governor has made it easier to enter a casino than a church.

Let me put this as plainly as I know how: Governor Sisolak’s decree is offensive to the Constitution and should be condemned by all friends of freedom. It is plainly evident that he would rather fill the belly of slot machines than acknowledge the souls of his constituents.

Justice Samuel Alito had this to say in his powerful dissent: “The Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion. It says nothing about the freedom to play craps or blackjack, to feed tokens into a slot machine, or to engage in any other game of chance. But the Governor of Nevada apparently has different priorities.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch also bemoaned the Court’s decision in his own dissent, writing that “there is no world in which the Constitution permits Nevada to favor Caesars Palace over Calvary Chapel.”

President Trump has appointed 200 Article III judges to the bench, including two to the U.S. Supreme Court. Decisions like this confirm that we are still at least one reliable justice short. The next president will almost certainly nominate at least one more Supreme Court associate justice. Who do you want sitting in the Oval Office when that happens?