Posted on 05/25/2020 7:16:13 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
They said it. I didn't.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled that Democratic California Gavin Newsom's ban on in-person church services during the coronavirus pandemic can stand.
The lawsuit, filed by South Bay United Pentecostal Church in San Diego, prevents that church from reopening, according to the Los Angeles Times
The "constitutional standards that would normally govern our review of a Free Exercise claim should not be applied," wrote the two judges in the majority opinion.
"We're dealing here with a highly contagious and often fatal disease for which there presently is no known cure. In the words of Justice Robert Jackson, if a '(c)ourt does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact,'" according to the opinion.
The ruling came from Judges Jacqueline Nguyen and Barry Silverman, Nguyen is an Obama appointee and Silverman, a Clinton appointee. The 9th Circuit has a longstanding terrible reputation, but this is a new low.
About the only thing Nguyen and Silverman didn't do is reference crying fire in a theater. Perhaps these two lefty scholars can point us to where the First Amendment states, "except in an emergency".
Are they proposing the suspension of the Bill of Rights until there's a cure. Which may never happen.
Bizarrely, the Democrat judges are quoting a minority dissent arguing that speech could be censored if it was inflammatory. Jackson was arguing that the authorities should have the right to stop Nazi supporters from saying racist things in public because it would lead to disorder and then America would go the way of Nazi Germany. Jackson was a great man, but wrong in this case. That he's being quoted by the majority in this ruling is troubling at best considering the original implications.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
It will happen when the judge is impeached and tried for treason.
Just be stupid enough to print your treason in an opinion.
Agree. Bring it on.
The court thus provides for a limited en banc review by the Chief Judge and a panel of 10 randomly selected judges.
We start with one Rapin Bill judge (the Chief POS), and then cut our luck on the remaining ten.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
do they draw straws for the remaining ten?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.