Posted on 02/07/2024 9:03:20 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
TRENTON, N.J. -- A federal appeals court shot down claims Monday that New Jersey residents' refusal to wear face masks at school board meetings during the COVID-19 outbreak constituted protected speech under the First Amendment.
The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling in two related cases stemming from lawsuits against officials in Freehold and Cranford, New Jersey.
The suits revolved around claims that the plaintiffs were retaliated against by school boards because they refused to wear masks during public meetings. In one of the suits, the court sent the case back to a lower court for consideration. In the other, it said the plaintiff failed to show she was retaliated against.
Still, the court found that refusing to wear a mask during a public health emergency didn't amount to free speech protected by the Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
But burning an American flag is.
How about we burn all those stupid masks?
COVID and the “lockdown” was a political action.
The mask manufacturer certifies that the mask is useless against viruses.
Refusing to wear the mask is a political statement.
So if the government lies to force compliance we have to be sheep and follow orders, there is no recourse.
That is a bad example of when not wearing a face mask can be considered free speech.
Our courts are a joke.
Never mind the fact that the damn things don’t even work for the intended purpose.
I’m old enough to remember when
wearing sunglasses in banks was strongly discouraged much less a freakin’ face covering.
covid masks are the greatest thing to come along for criminals since the Saturday night special.
It’s insanity.
I agree with the burning masks part. But let’s substitute alphabet flags and muzzy flags for American flags 🇺🇸.
Years of rat judicial appointments have all but destroyed the courts along with everything else.
“What a crock”
Not completely. As long as the wearer is a health risk, and the mask will deter cough or sneeze projectiles which we know occur, it is a health issue and not the right to free speech. Considering it as a free speech issue places it into a personal choice, ill or not, no matter what the determination.
You can say what you want within reason and you are covered by the first for speech. But taking an action to express your disagreement with the government by placing others into a health hazzard is not within that freedom. Freedom of speech is a very broad determined area of freedoms. But they do not allow placing people in harm’s way to exercise.
This is court backed:
In Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the Court upheld a Massachusetts law allowing local public health officials to require vaccination against smallpox. While the petitioner in Jacobson argued that the compulsory vaccination law infringed upon his right to care for his own body and health in such way as to him seems best, the Court explained that the state’s interest in protecting communities against the spread of disease was of paramount necessity.
wy69
“What a crock”
Not completely. As long as the wearer is a health risk, and the mask will deter cough or sneeze projectiles which we know occur, it is a health issue and not the right to free speech. Considering it as a free speech issue places it into a personal choice, ill or not, no matter what the determination.
You can say what you want within reason and you are covered by the first for speech. But taking an action to express your disagreement with the government by placing others into a health hazzard is not within that freedom. Freedom of speech is a very broad determined area of freedoms. But they do not allow placing people in harm’s way to exercise.
This is court backed:
In Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the Court upheld a Massachusetts law allowing local public health officials to require vaccination against smallpox. While the petitioner in Jacobson argued that the compulsory vaccination law infringed upon his right to care for his own body and health in such way as to him seems best, the Court explained that the state’s interest in protecting communities against the spread of disease was of paramount necessity.
wy69
I think stripping off clothes is considered free “speech?”
When I wore one under force, it either read This mask is a useless as my governor or was a fake mask made of mesh.
Mandatory masks are not different than Hitler requiring Jews to wear a yellow star.
Yes there is.
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.