Posted on 06/19/2020 2:07:37 AM PDT by abb
For people of faith demoralized by coercive shutdown policies, that raises a question: If officials are now exempting protesters, how can they justify continuing to restrict worshippers? The answer is that they can’t. Government does not have carte blanche, even in a pandemic, to pick and choose which First Amendment rights are “open” and which remain “closed.”
Instead, laws that burden religion while exempting the non-religious must pass strict scrutiny. SeeChurch of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 546 (1993). The burden on religion “must be justified by a compelling governmental interest,” and the law “must be narrowly tailored to advance that interest.” Id.at 531–32. That is a heavy lift: Such laws “will survive strict scrutiny only in rare cases.” Id.at 546.
It is common knowledge, and easily proved, that protestors do not comply with social distancing requirements.3 But instead of enforcing the Governor’s orders, officials are encouraging the protests—out of an admirable, if belated, respect for First Amendment rights. The Governor himself commended citizens for “appropriately expressing their concerns and exercising their First Amendment Rights.”4 And he predicted that “we will continue to see peaceful, nonviolent demonstrations and protests where people properly exercise their First Amendment rights.”5
If protests are exempt from social distancing requirements, then worship must be too. As the United States recently observed, “California’s political leaders have expressed support for such peaceful protests and, from all appearances, have not required them to adhere to the now operative 100-person limit. . . . [I]t could raise First Amendment concerns if California were to hold other protests . . . to a different standard.” Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae at 24, Givens v. Newsom, No. 20-15949 (9th Cir. June 10, 2020). The same principle should apply to people of faith. See, e.g., Lukumi, 508 U.S. at 537 (“[Where] individualized exemptions from a general requirement are available, the fovernment may not refuse to extend that system to cases of religious hardship without compelling reason.”) (quotations omitted).
I really don’t think letting protestors have free reign to loot and pillage has anything to do with the governor’s respect for First Amendment Rights.
I rather believe that it has to do with preventing a Trump second term.
They are intending a campaign showing Trump as an ineffective and weak president that through his actions spreads hate and discontent among minorities by his racist actions (whether he in any way actually has any such actions or not).
The Constitution is not respected or honored by communists, liberals, George Soros, or now the SCOTUS. Liberals want what they want, and no silly document will keep them from it. Thus, why they are always trying to disarm Americans, and yet impose outlandishly dangerous schemes like defund the police.
Obama used our own tax dollar funded intelligence against us, and nothing happened. We have a entire 6 block area of Seattle wherein Americans have lost their fundamental rights and property to liberals.
Voting matters. Elections matter, for a little while longer. But don’t fool yourself, the Government no longer fears the people.
All this is fine, but don’t leave home without your mask.
“What’s good for the goose is good for the gander”
Plain talk is easy to understand
Yep. I was required to wear one today when we went shopping for some new furniture for the family room, something we had planned to do in the Spring prior to the COVID-19 nonsense.
Bring your mask.
L8r
Last sentence, I believe has a typo; fovernment s/b F*overnment.
copy/paste picked the wrong letter. Should be government.
Exactly right. The riots and so forth are campaign rallies. So for us, gathering to worship is a protest.
Except when it does.
Yeah, but when the supreme court can pick or choose which ones they want to follow, then what’s the point?.
So...closing churches? Freedom of Religion...1st Amendment? Banning funerals? Freedom of Assembly?
And yet rioting in the streets was just fine.Even our "health experts" declared that racism was just too important to rule out rioting as being dangerous.
I'd have gone somewhere else, and let them know why.
This was mainly driven by county/city ordinances, unlike with a place like Costco which is doing this nationwide. There are very few furniture stores out here in the burbs worth shopping at. At least the place we bought our spare room mattress two week ago was in our county and didn't have the mask requirement (unlike Mattress Firm, which did).
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.