Will wonders never cease...
If you want to be added, please FReepMail me.
Posted on 06/14/2021 3:58:14 AM PDT by Kaslin
Mask Mandates are presumptively unconstitutional. At least in Florida. In a strongly worded opinion, Florida’s First District Court of Appeal reversed a lower court which had originally ruled in favor of Alachua County’s coronavirus mask mandate. As Judge Tanenbaum noted, starting in May 2020, Alachua citizen Justin Green “found himself under the yoke of a mask mandate, accomplished through a series of emergency orders from the chair of the board of county commissioners.” Green decided to do what many wish they had done and took the county to court by seeking an injunction against the mask mandate from Judge Dona Keim.
As you have figured out by now, Green won at the court of appeals because the court recognized that – at least in Florida – a citizen has a privacy right that includes the right “to be let alone by government.” Judge Tanenbaum and the 1st District Court of Appeals sent the case back down to Judge Keim to reconsider the injunction in light of this privacy right as described by the Court of Appeals ruling. What Judge Keim may ultimately do – or whether Alachua County asks the Florida Supreme Court to take up the case is anyone’s guess. If nothing else, this ruling is remarkable because it is best described as an epic judicial smackdown.
To understand why this is such a smackdown, you need to know that Judge Keim mistakenly ruled originally that Mr. Green’s privacy right in going naked-faced around town was no greater than the “right of his fellow citizens not to become infected.” The opinion is silent on what evidence Judge Keim may have considered in reaching the conclusion that face coverings work to prevent infection. It’s also important to note that there was never any allegation that Green was ever infected himself with anything. Reading between the lines it sure looks like Judge Keim is making some assumptions on this point – maybe we will learn more at the next hearing.
What is meant by “presumptively unconstitutional?” The short answer is that there is a right to privacy. That right – unlike some other rights – is considered “fundamental” and as such it outranks other less important rights. Any law or “diktat’ issued by a county commissioner that infringes on a fundamental right is presumed to be unconstitutional and will be struck down unless there is a “compelling state interest” and the diktat is narrowly tailored to serve that compelling interest.
BREAKING: Green v. Alachua County. #MaskMandates are "presumptively unconstitutional" under Florida law pic.twitter.com/72n4s5brfc— Philip Holloway ?? (@PhilHollowayEsq) June 11, 2021
So what did Judge Keim get wrong? Well – as it turns out Judge Keim wielded the judicial rubber stamp when she “did not subject the mask mandate to strict-scrutiny analysis, because the court concluded at the threshold that there was no cognizable constitutional right in play. As the trial court put it in its order, “[t]here is no recognized constitutional right not to wear a facial covering in public locations or to expose other citizens of the county to a contagious and potentially lethal virus during a declared pandemic emergency.”
Oops. But there’s more.
The trial court, though, did not assess Florida law to consider Green’s asserted right of privacy. Indeed, it never discussed or even referenced the Florida Constitution’s express guarantee of privacy.
Double oops.
Judge Keim gets a do-over.
Judge Tanenbaum makes many excellent points and everyone should read the entire opinion. But one point Judge Tanenbaum makes about naked faces is a particularly important legal point. You might be wondering what masking has to do with privacy. Well it works like this. A fundamental right to privacy includes complete freedom of a person to control his own body which therefore means "a person can reasonably expect not to be forced by the government to put something on his own face against his will.” Clearly Judge Tanenbaum is telling Judge Keim that the right to facial nakedness is greater that whatever infection risk, if any, Mr. Green may have posed to his fellow Walmart shoppers.
Like many other lawyers, I have watched and waited over the course of the Covid19 pandemic as lawyers have remained on the sidelines and courts acted as mere rubber stamps in approving any and all manner of arbitrary and legally dubious local, state, and federal edicts.
This is not the first challenge to a mask mandate or other of the patchwork of various COVID protocols we have been living with nor is it likely to be the last. And this ruling admittedly is limited in its own direct impact on anyone other than Mr. Green in his quest to breathe free. But what this ruling does is it shows that some judges will stand up for the constitution and for individual freedom even when doing so may be unpopular.
It is refreshing to know there are at least some in the legal world who understand one core principle:
Even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.
Is this a state or Federal court? I’ve wanted to see at least one Federal court challenge the powers that numerous Governors have claimed to have over the last 16 months. IIRC last summer a Federal judge in PA struck down many of the orders that their Rat Party hack Governor had issued...but I assume that he appealed the order.
We can’t all live in Florida...
Should people who hold our former republic dear just band together and buy another state?
Assume that masks work to prevent the inhalation of infection vectors for something like COVID (they don’t). In a society guided by liberty, people can choose to wear a mask to prevent infection bidirectionally while others can choose to take their chances. This is a fundamental aspect of liberty.
For instance, we should be permitted to arm ourselves with a means to self-defense be it a handgun, rifle, or RPG and be expected to exercise that right with responsibility. Irresponsible individuals would and should be dispatched either legally or with force.
Likewise, we should be able to speak freely in public provided that speech does not negatively impact another person (i.e. yelling fire in a theater). If some idiot wants to stand on a street corner handing out white supremacist (or black supremacist) literature, that is their right and we should support it. We don’t have to support the subject matter, but we should support the right of the person.
This was a good decision on the part of the court. We should be free to make decisions about our health and our safety that are solely ours, benefits and consequences bearing on the executor.
I'm completely against masks, so I'm just being a jerk here, but -- by this logic, why do I need to wear clothing?
Have you looked in the mirror lately?
“compelling state interest”
It won’t stop with mask. Eventually, you will need permission to venture outside and when you do, you will need a hazmat suit.
This would also support the individual right to wear an Islamic headcoverg.
Isn’t this great!? This common sense ruling on 1 hand; then a pinko judge ruling against workers in Houston on the other.
Screw the judges. They are political bastards.
BTTT!
State court.
Will wonders never cease...
Wearing a mask has no effect on virus. It’s like trying to stop a mosquito with a chain link fence.
Why is the government and it’s henchmen trying to force people to do something that has no effect other than to make people angry?.....................
Why is the government and it’s henchmen trying to force people to do something that has no effect other than to make people angry?.....................
An exercise in political power. Getting people used to it for what is coming.
Alachua County
Home of Gainsville, a large college town/city. I imagine they’re very woke.
Thanks for the ping.
And yet, the opinion itself wasn't actually linked to.
A pet peeve of mine. If you're going to talk about a decision, link to the damned thing.
Not a dig at you Kaslin.
You should wear clothing to prevent embarrassing yourself.
Why show your oversize belly and undersize tool in public?
Mask does have a function, which is to minimize virus load expelled by infected person during cough, sneeze or loud talk.
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.