during a national emergency the constitution can be suspended. This has already been decided by the supreme court many times.
Not opining at the merits of the petition, but if it’s a first amendment issue shouldn’t it be a petition to the Supreme Court?
Your right to do what makes you happy ends with you depriving others of LIFE.
Luck just meet out of doors like it’s the 1960s !
there’s a whole different requirements from the federales between indoor and outdoor meetings and air quality
The only thing they’re trying to regulate is air quality
State & local health departments have greater jurisdiction than the Feds during a health emergency.
there definitely is a pandemic exception to first amendment rights to assembly, as long as they are restricting mass assembly generally, and not just some kinds of gatherings, it will pass constitutional muster.
why should governors need to hold a plebiscite to implement emergency measures? we are a republic, not a democracy.
Why? I think not getting together is a great idea.
Are speed limits un-Constitutional?
These limits are mostly just suggestions. They aren’t like busting up crowds or anything. Now most venues are enforcing them, so you’ll have a hard time going past it unless you head to a park or something. But if you reaaaaaaaaalllllly want to get in close proximity to hundreds of people, nobody is gonna stop you.
It is well established in law that certain rights can be suspended in times of extreme emergency where the public safety may require it. There is some cautious optimism that we may have found an effective treatment for this thing. But until that is certain we need to err on the side of caution. This has been done in the past, notably during the 1918 pandemic. Legally these folks are not on good ground.
My Marine vet buddy visited family in Miami. He’s in his early 30’s and healthy. He and his GF became ghastly ill and stayed that way for three weeks. They’re over it now, but still having a difficult time breathing and their sinuses are still running. So, probably still able to transmit the disease.
The problem isn’t so much for the young, though what he described was horribly unpleasant. The death rate for people in their 70’s is estimated at 8.5% and at !5% for people in their 80’s. So, yes, overall the death rate is low. But if you love the older people in your life, just put up with restricted gatherings for a few weeks.
Welcome to a republic. It ain’t a democracy.
Thank God.
stupid
c u next year
If people disobey restrictions, then they should not be allowed to have access to healthcare and ventilators. Die at home.
Are you sure about that?
Think about drug laws: some religions like to smoke week (Rastafarians) or eat hallucinogenic mushrooms (AmerIndian), but this doesn't mean that they can ignore drug laws of the United States. This has been litigated many times, and their are certain tests - one of which is "is there a particular burden placed on religious organizations, or is it a common burden placed on everyone?".
If the government were passing laws saying "no large religious meetings may take place on Fridays - that would clearly be aimed at one religious group (Muslims) and so, unconstitutional.
What is happening now is not like that, and would certainly pass Constitutional muster if taken to the Supreme Court.
One thing we learned is that if the government suggests that churches shut down, they readily comply.
Worked out well for that Washington State Church Choir.
If your upset with your governor you should first exhaust all courses of redress available to you at the state level.
Don’t run to the FedMob as a first resort. We are a union of states with a republican form of government.