Posted on 09/15/2020 5:03:58 AM PDT by cotton1706
Pennsylvania was like most states at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, soon enough implementing a series of coronavirus lockdowns and related mandates that included shuttering “non-life-sustaining” businesses to curb the spread of the virus. The measures also included clamping down on gatherings of 25 people indoors and 250 people outdoors.
Unfortunately, the restrictions led a group of plaintiffs including hair salons, drive-in movie theaters, as well as some Republican officeholders to file a lawsuit against Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf and his health secretary against measures they claimed were over-broad and infringed on their rights. And, in a bit of a surprise, a federal judge on Monday ended up siding with the plaintiffs. That means, US District Judge William Stickman IV ruled, the state’s actions were unconstitutional.
While the ruling, according to local news accounts, acknowledged that the measures were an understandable response to COVID-19 and “were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency,” Stickman goes on to declare that “even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered. The Constitution cannot accept the concept of a ‘new normal’ where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures.”
Elsewhere in Stickman’s ruling, he opined that “Good intentions toward a laudable end are not enough to uphold governmental action against a constitutional challenge.” Among the consequences of this ruling, plaintiffs attorney Thomas W. King III told reporters after it was issued, is that the current pandemic-related restrictions in place in the state such as limitations on the size of gatherings cannot be enforced.
(Excerpt) Read more at bgr.com ...
“...shuttering “non-life-sustaining” businesses...
“The Constitution cannot accept the concept of a ‘new normal’ where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures.”
Ooooh. This could be used to get rid of the PC police, overly zealous TSA searches, and lots of other post-9/11 acts of tyranny in the color of public good.
“Good intentions toward a laudable end are not enough to uphold governmental action against a constitutional challenge.”
“good policy can be unconstitutional. Bad policy can be unconstitutional. That’s why you have to go to the text.” Clarence Thomas.
This judge followed the text. Maryland has a similar case. A friend of mine is one of the main plaintiffs. The district judge shot it down and we’re waiting on the Court of Appeals to rule.
Time to take our country back!
NFL
Planned Parenthood. Or, as I like to call it, Prevent Parenthood.
FREEDOM!
compares police response to BLM protest to police response to anti-lockdown protesters:
VIDEO: 7m: 11 Sept: Sky News Australia: Andrew Bolt: Victoria is a ‘basket case’
Sky News host Andrew Bolt says Victoria has demonstrated there is increasingly one law for the peaceful and another for the dangerous.
It comes after a large Black Lives Matter protest recently went ahead in Melbourne despite being banned by the state’s virus laws; no attendees were arrested or charged by Victoria Police.
Victorian Police Chief Commissioner Shane Patton defended the decisions saying “the most significant thing to remember back then … we had around the world cities that were burning, we had protests that were violent.
“We made a decision here that our priority was public order … we had significant concerns that we would have that type of mayhem in Melbourne,” Mr Patton said.
“There seems to be one law for the peaceful and another for the dangerous,” Mr Bolt said. “The easier you are to bully around because you are a law-abiding, nice person … the more your freedoms are actually in danger.
“The state where this is most obvious … is Victoria.
“It really is a basket case … it’s madness there.”
https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6189809128001
Bump
Emperor Wolf and his he-bitch will be fighting this...
FWIW, the guy in the video seems a bit linguine-spined, but what the heck. Better kate than never.
Tomorrow in the above is today, BTW.
Forty-one years old.
Trump’s next USSC nominee!!!
But the hack democrat judges on the PA Supreme Court have already ruled that Wolf can rule like a dictator and shut down business, churches, youth camps, gyms, etc.
Who has supremacy?
“Planned Barrenhood”.
And one Pittsburgh Steelers team beat the Giants of New York last night.
abortion
Does anyone have a link to the text of the judge’s ruling?
I will be at a large outdoor gathering in a few days, and I want to have something to hand out to calm the panicky sheep and mute the roving mask Karens.
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.