Posted on 04/22/2020 2:50:56 PM PDT by ransomnote
Attorney General William P. Barr issued the following statement:
"In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the President has issued guidelines calling on all Americans to do their part to slow the spread of a dangerous and highly contagious virus. Those measures are important because the virus is transmitted so easily from person to person, and because it all too often has life-threatening consequences for its victims, it has the potential to overwhelm health care systems when it surges.
To contain the virus and protect the most vulnerable among us, Americans have been asked, for a limited period of time, to practice rigorous social distancing. The President has also asked Americans to listen to and follow directions issued by state and local authorities regarding social distancing. Social distancing, while difficult and unfamiliar for a nation that has long prided itself on the strength of its voluntary associations, has the potential to save hundreds of thousands of American lives from an imminent threat. Scrupulously observing these guidelines is the best path to swiftly ending COVID-19’s profound disruptions to our national life and resuming the normal economic life of our country. Citizens who seek to do otherwise are not merely assuming risk with respect to themselves, but are exposing others to danger. In exigent circumstances, when the community as a whole faces an impending harm of this magnitude, and where the measures are tailored to meeting the imminent danger, the constitution does allow some temporary restriction on our liberties that would not be tolerated in normal circumstances.
But even in times of emergency, when reasonable and temporary restrictions are placed on rights, the First Amendment and federal statutory law prohibit discrimination against religious institutions and religious believers. Thus, government may not impose special restrictions on religious activity that do not also apply to similar nonreligious activity. For example, if a government allows movie theaters, restaurants, concert halls, and other comparable places of assembly to remain open and unrestricted, it may not order houses of worship to close, limit their congregation size, or otherwise impede religious gatherings. Religious institutions must not be singled out for special burdens.
Today, the Department filed a Statement of Interest in support of a church in Mississippi that allegedly sought to hold parking lot worship services, in which congregants listened to their pastor preach over their car radios, while sitting in their cars in the church parking lot with their windows rolled up. The City of Greenville fined congregants $500 per person for attending these parking lot services – while permitting citizens to attend nearby drive-in restaurants, even with their windows open.[1] The City appears to have thereby singled churches out as the only essential service (as designated by the state of Mississippi) that may not operate despite following all CDC and state recommendations regarding social distancing.
As we explain in the Statement of Interest, where a state has not acted evenhandedly, it must have a compelling reason to impose restrictions on places of worship and must ensure that those restrictions are narrowly tailored to advance its compelling interest. While we believe that during this period there is a sufficient basis for the social distancing rules that have been put in place, the scope and justification of restrictions beyond that will have to be assessed based on the circumstances as they evolve.
Religion and religious worship continue to be central to the lives of millions of Americans. This is true more so than ever during this difficult time. The pandemic has changed the ways Americans live their lives. Religious communities have rallied to the critical need to protect the community from the spread of this disease by making services available online and in ways that otherwise comply with social distancing guidelines.
The United States Department of Justice will continue to ensure that religious freedom remains protected if any state or local government, in their response to COVID-19, singles out, targets, or discriminates against any house of worship for special restrictions."
[1] The City has since stated it will drop the fines, but will continue to enforce the order.
There’s plenty more lawsuits about this, and suits against gun store closings that Barr needs to get busy with.
“the constitution does allow some temporary restriction on our liberties that would not be tolerated in normal circumstances. “
Brain Fart here, would someone please highlight that part in the Constitution for me?
Interesting news. I don’t know about creating a thread for it though. But if anyone thinks that it is worthy.
From another Forum:
“POTUS just issued a letter to Madame Speaker. Bssically tells her he is by passing Congressional Authority for the Covid stimulus program”
https://twitter.com/TheCollectiveQ/status/1253065522985537541
“Brain Fart here, would someone please highlight that part in the Constitution for me?”
Probably under “promote the general welfare”, is my guess.
Our neighbors are going to go all social distancing at a gun range one of them built. Several of us are going up. I need to scope in my neat .22 magnum rifle. Then followed by a BBQ.
Text of the Letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate
whitehouse.gov ^ | April 22, 2020 | President Donald J Trump
Posted on 4/22/2020, 3:50:49 PM by ransomnote
So will he now write a separate statement for each of the 100,000+ other churchs that have been shutdown?
I doubt it so this amounts to nothing more than virtue signaling.
JoMa
Read the article. The DOJ specifically got involved in this case because there’s now an active lawsuit underway.
Yes, I read the article and you made my point for me. Now every single church needs to fill a law suit just to get back our Constitutional rights, church by church, and by doing so, Barr would need to write a separate letter for each law suit. I estimate there will be more than 100,000 letters.
JoMa
Nobody has to write 100,000 letters. The DOJ has thousands of attorneys who get involved in cases like this. This first legal brief — not a “letter” —will be referenced as an exhibit in every similar case from this point forward ... because the exact same legal arguments will apply in all future cases.
Glad he singled out the case in Mississippi - down on the coast, only the “Blackest” community has had any strictness to the restrictions - maybe their Black Mayor knows something about his little town...which does have its reputation...
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.