Tag Archives: #FreedomofAssembly

Posted on by

Using the Freedom of Speech and of the Press to condemn other people’s Freedom of Speech

My good friend William Tech’s website, The Pirate’s Cove, has as it’s blog tagline, “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” That’s the important part of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” What part of “no law” is so difficult to understand?

Well, some very good people in Minnesota are very upset that the First Amendment protects the freedom of speech and religion of people they despise. From The Washington Post:

Facing a First Amendment fight, a small Minnesota town allows a White supremacist church

By Kim Bellware | December 14, 2020 | 6:00 AM EST

The nation’s ascendant White supremacy movement and small-town bureaucracy collided in rural Minnesota last week when a city council vote over a zoning permit made the 273-person city of Murdock the latest First Amendment battleground.

The Murdock City Council voted 3-1 during a virtual meeting Wednesday to allow the Asatru Folk Assembly to turn the run-down church it purchased in July into its first “hof,” or gathering place, in the Midwest. The looming presence of the obscure Nordic folk religion, widely classified as a White supremacist hate group by extremism and religious experts, promoted months of pushback from concerned residents.

The group purchased a building, and were planning to use it for a legal purpose. The Mayor and City Council didn’t like it, but them not liking it did not mean the city government had any right to block a legal assembly.

Some, naturally, argue that the First Amendment should not cover such a group:

Murdock’s issue underscores the deficiencies with the First Amendment and exposes a lack of neutrality in who it really protects, argued Laura Beth Nielsen, who chairs the Sociology Department at Northwestern University and wrote the 2004 book “License to Harass: Law, Hierarchy and Offensive Public Speech.”

“Right now, every local government is broke trying to deal with coronavirus. The idea that you would arguably subject yourself to a costly lawsuit — what town would want to do that?” Nielsen said. “But letting these organizations flourish and take root is scary, especially if you’re the Black or the Jewish family in town.”

She said Murdock’s individual battle is taking place in a broader legal and social environment where, “in the universe of the First Amendment, White people tend to win.”

White people tend to win? Surely there was little more offensive speech than that of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who called Judaism a “gutter religion.” He was condemned for that, but not fined or imprisoned, because his speech, no matter how vile, is protected by the First Amendment. The Reverend Al Sharpton has uttered plenty of anti-white and anti-Semitic bovine feces, but his statements, too, have, and deserve to have, the protection of the First Amendment. I do not have to like Messrs Farrakhan and Sharpton to believe that they have freedom of speech just as much as I do.

There’s a bit of irony in all of this, because Professor Neilsen is exercising her freedom of speech and freedom of the press to complain that other people’s freedom of speech and of peaceable assembly is “scary.”

The city council in Murdock, Minn., voted December 9 to grant a permit that allows the Asatru Folk Assembly, which has been identified as a white supremacist group, to gather at an abandoned church it bought. (Renee Jones Schneider/AP)

There’s much more at the Post original, with statements by other people, but I want to point out the final two paragraphs:

Nielsen, the Northwestern sociologist, noted that cities routinely restrict the First Amendment over issues it prioritizes, such as anti-pandhandling ordinances or obscenity laws.

“Even though the First Amendment is supposed to operate in this neutral way, when you dig in, hate speech against racial minorities is protected; harassment of women is protected,” Nielsen said. “In the big picture, the First Amendment is reinforcing who already has power.”

span style=”font-family: Georgia;”>To be fair, there is no quotation from the good professor that she believes the First Amendment should somehow be restricted; whether she says anything like that in any of her books, I do not know. But I do know that restrictions on speech, were they allowed, could condemn my website, given that our published Stylebook is not supportive of homosexuality and does not accept ‘transgenderism.’ With the incoming Administration of Joe Biden, RedState, where I frequently cross-post, could be shut down by the government for the many articles there which claim that the Democrats engaged in massive fraud and stole a presidential election they did not legitimately win.[1]I would note here that none of my articles make that claim.

When freedom of speech or the press is limited, the ox which gets gored depends on just who has the power to gore it.

The First Amendment has been used to protect many things I do not like: the American Nazi Party’s march in heavily Jewish Skokie, Illinois, the Westboro Baptist Church’s protests at the funerals of American soldiers, in Snyder v Phelps (2011), or the flag burning case, Texas v Johnson (1989), but it was right to protect those offensive actions. The First Amendment protects The Washington Post’s right to print Professor Neilsen’s objections. There are many things I’d rather not see voiced or printed, but it would be far, far worse for the government to have the power to ban them.
__________________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

References

References
↑1 I would note here that none of my articles make that claim.
Posted on by

Rights delayed are rights denied

We have thrice previously noted Governor Andy Beshear’s executive order closing all public and private Kindergarten through 12th grade schools, and Danville Christian Academy’s legal actions to enjoin enforcement of that order against private religious schools. While the private religious initially won, the Governor appealed to the Sixth Circuit, and the appellate court agreed with him, leaving the religious schools closed.

That was two weeks ago. An application for a stay was filed with Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh on Tuesday, December 1st, and several subsequent motions have been filed, but today is Monday, December 14th, and the private religious schools’ constitutional rights have been held in abeyance for two full weeks now.

Two weeks, during Advent, a highly important time of the year for Christians. Being December 14th, there’s only a week of school left this year before closure for the Christmas holidays. If the Supreme Court does not act, immediately, there will be no operative decision from the Court on whether the Governor’s orders have violated our First Amendment rights to freedom of peaceable assembly and free exercise of religion, because the Governor’s order expires before school would normally resume in January. However, there is nothing currently preventing Mr Beshear from extending his executive order past January 4th.

The Governor claimed that his order was “a time-limited executive order that is set to expire in just four weeks,” as though it is somehow permissible to suspend our constitutional rights for a limited period, though he continues just two sentences later to say that he could, “if necessary,” extend the order beyond the current January 4, 2021, expiration of the executive order. The appellants responded that, even now, Mr Beshear is attempting “to lift the injunction prohibiting him from closing Kentucky’s houses of worship,” so that he can order churches closed as well. We have previously noted that the Governor wants all churches to be closed down, but the four Catholic bishops in Kentucky have decided to continue public worship.

Our authoritarian Governor just hates to be defied, and he’s trying to get the injunction in Maryville Baptist Church, Inc. v Beshear lifted so that he can order churches closed, as he did last spring.

COVID-19 is serious, and has been fatal in a small percentage of cases, but the threat to our Constitution and our rights is far, far greater, and the Supreme Court needs to slap down such attempts.

As we have previously noted, Republicans hold veto-proof majorities in both chambers of the General Assembly, and GOP leaders have stated that they intend to rein in the Governor’s emergency powers under KRS 39A, but, while that would be welcome, and should happen to prevent future abuse, the Supreme Court needs to say, and set the precedent, that our explicitly stated constitutional rights cannot be simply set aside because the government, any government claims to have a good reason to do so.

Posted on by

“You’re not smart enough to tell me how to live.” — Kathy Shaidle

Robert Stacey Stacy McCain said that he once “dubbed Kathy Shaidle the Only Good Canadian.”

My general hatred of Canada is so well-known I’m surprised the SPLC hasn’t taken notice, but that’s the thing about hating Canadians — it’s so commonplace that even liberals don’t object to it. Anyway, some of my readers objected that Kathy was not the only good Canadian, and I’m willing to stipulate that there may be a few others like her, but none of them could possibly be as good as she is. Her blog Five Feet of Fury was a regular read back in the day, and she’s been a columnist at various outlets — including a stint at PJMedia, another at Taki’s, and most recently doing film reviews at Mark Steyn’s place. Her most famous aphorism is, “You’re not smart enough to tell me how to live.”

Well, Kathy developed ovarian cancer, which is now in a very advanced stage, and her husband who blogs at Blazing Cat Fur has got an online fundraiser to which everyone should contribute.

Unlike the esteemed Mr McCain, I have no animosity toward Canucks. They’re mostly good people, and, other than British Columbia, eastern Ontario and Quebec, mostly conservative. President Trump was wrong: it wasn’t Greenland we should have taken, but the English speaking parts of Canada. We could have a 62-star flag, and still leave Puerto Rico out!

They play very good hockey, and I’d much rather see a Canadian team win the Stanley Cup than an American team from someplace like Tampa or Las Vegas or Anaheim. Should anyplace where kids can’t play hockey outdoors on a frozen pond ever be considered for an NHL franchise?

But, I digress. With so many good conservative voices, I completely missed 5 Feet of Fury, which is, to be honest, a still active but mostly abandoned site, and thus I missed what Mr McCain called her most famous aphorism, “You’re not smart enough to tell me how to live.”

I tend to use the lines from Jonathan Edwards’ Sunshine, “He can’t even run his own life, I’ll be damned if he’ll run mine!”

The left are so stupid that they think this is a chick. More, they think they can somehow compel me to go along with their idiocy.

That’s the problem with today’s left: they think that they are smarter than the common people, and that they should be able to tell other people how to live. They’re so stupid that they can’t even tell the differences between males and females anymore, but they still think they are smarter than you. Democratic, and, sadly, a couple of Republican, Governors across the nation think that they can tell you who and how many people you can have visit you in your own home, because it’s for your own good. Democratic, and, sadly, a couple of Republican, Governors across this nation think that they can tell you when and how and even if you can exercise your constitutional right to assemble, peaceably or how and when and even if you can freely exercise your religious faith.

And before Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg went to her eternal reward, and was replaced by Amy Coney Barrett, the Supreme Court even went along with that, in Calvary Chapel, Dayton Valley v Sisolak and South Bay Pentecostal Church v Newsom.

I will concede, albeit grudgingly, that there are some people smarter than me. But I will not concede that just because someone else might be smarter than me, that he would have some right, some authority, to not only tell me how to live my life, but compel me to follow his orders. After all, if that were the case, then I would have the right to compel everyone not as intelligent as me to live their lives according to my dictates.

There is, of course, our constitutional right to the freedom of speech. I do have the right to tell other people how I think they should run their lives. And I concede that even government leaders have their own free speech rights to tell other people how they think they should run their lives. But I absolutely deny that any state Governor, any President, any Mayor, anyone at all, has the authority to compel me to live my life according to their dictates rather than my own agency.

Those lines from Jonathan Edwards would have, not so long ago, gotten a high five from the left. Today, the left appear to believe in the freedom of choice on exactly one thing; everything else should be according to their dictates.

Well, not just no, but Hell no!

Posted on by

Democratic Governors see 1984 not as a cautionary tale, but a blueprint for fighting COVID-19

The fat filmmaker, Michael Moore, said of Americans resisting the dictates of the oh-so-nobly-intended Democratic Governors imposing draconian COVID-19 rules on our country:

“Why do you want to die? Why — to take a stand against us liberals, to show us a thing or two?”

Americans don’t want to die, yet many Americans have willingly risked death to protect our constitutional rights as Americans. Patrick Henry said it best: “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

The ‘defense’ the left claim we must undertake to save ourselves from the scourge of the virus, is to lose our freedom of peaceable assembly, to lose our right to freely practice our faith, and, of course, lose our right to keep and bear arms. We must lose our livelihoods, we must lose our careers, and, for some, that means losing their homes. We must forget seeing our families and our friends, we must eschew our holidays and our traditions, we must lock ourselves in our homes, venturing out only for milk and bread, and forget being the social beings that humans are. To save our human lives, we must stop being human beings. Not just no, but Hell no!

Orwellian society, as envisioned in 1984, was a regimented place, where friendships were discouraged, in which the public were encouraged to spy and snitch on others, where romance was forbidden and sex restricted to procreation. How much different is that from what Gavin Newsom and Andrew Cuomo would force upon us today?

Posted on by

Democrisy: It seems that Democrats in government don’t believe the rules they set for others apply to themselves

It was mostly an internet meme, circulating through the evil reich-wing communities, but, eventually, the credentialed media had to take notice; the election being over, it wasn’t as harmful to their causes anyway.

Politicians across U.S. eat own words after dining out, taking trips

by Juliet Williams, Associated Press | December 3, 2020 | 7:00 AM EST

SAN FRANCISCO — Their messaging has been clear: wear a mask; stay 6 feet apart; and, most importantly, stay home!

But their actions aren’t living up to the rhetoric, creating a real political problem for some of the most vocal leaders in California’s fight to contain the coronavirus.

First came Gov. Gavin Newsom, who won plaudits for issuing the first statewide stay-at-home order in the U.S. back in March. He broke the state rules when he and his wife were caught dining with 10 others at the posh French Laundry restaurant in Napa in early November with lobbyists and others from numerous different households, sitting close together, mask-less.

San Francisco’s mayor, London Breed, was at the same $350-a-plate restaurant a day later, dining with a San Francisco socialite and six others. Breed has also won accolades for imposing some of the strictest rules in California, keeping coronavirus rates relatively low. Her spokespeople haven’t responded to queries about how many households were there — state rules cap those at three. Her spokesman rubbed salt in the wound by saying she has been trying to support local restaurants. The French Laundry is 60 miles out of town.

The Associated Press article makes it sound like Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) was the first, but he wasn’t. Newsweek posted an article listing some of the others:

  • Mayor Steve Adler (D-Austin)
  • Governor Kevin Stitt (R-OK)
  • Mayor Michael Hancock (D-Denver)
  • Mayor Muriel Bowser (D-Washington DC)
  • Mayor Sam Liccardo (D-San José)
  • Mayor Lori Lightfoot (D-Chicago)

The article also noted that Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) was preparing to break his own rules, but when it became public in advance, he cancelled his plans due to the political backlash.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was caught on tape going to a private hair salon, for which the lovely Mrs Pelosi did not apologize, but simply claimed that she’d been set up by an evil reich-wing activist.

Of course, the people on the list are all over very large areas. I’m guessing that a lot of smaller city mayors and city councilmen, etc, have also violated the rules, but they aren’t important enough to have made the national news.

There is one Republican on the list, but Newsweek also stated that:

Republican governors have faced fewer accusations, largely because they have not implemented as many of the restrictions that public health experts have called for.

Translation: they have had more respect for our constitutional rights.

In his concurring opinion in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v Cuomo, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote:

Government is not free to disregard the First Amendment in times of crisis. At a minimum, that Amendment prohibits government officials from treating religious exercises worse than comparable secular activities, unless they are pursuing a compelling interest and using the least restrictive means available. Yet recently, during the COVID pandemic, certain States seem to have ignored these long-settled principles. . . . .

What could justify so radical a departure from the First Amendment’s terms and long-settled rules about its application? Our colleagues offer two possible answers. Initially, some point to a solo concurrence in South Bay Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, in which the Chief Justice expressed willingness to defer to executive orders in the pandemic’s early stages based on the newness of the emergency and how little was then known about the disease. At that time, COVID had been with us, in earnest, for just three months. Now, as we round out 2020 and face the prospect of entering a second calendar year living in the pandemic’s shadow, that rationale has expired according to its own terms. Even if the Constitution has taken a holiday during this pandemic, it cannot become a sabbatical. Rather than apply a nonbinding and expired concurrence from South Bay, courts must resume applying the Free Exercise Clause. . . . .

In the end, I can only surmise that much of the answer lies in a particular judicial impulse to stay out of the way in times of crisis. But if that impulse may be understandable or even admirable in other circumstances, we may not shelter in place when the Constitution is under attack. Things never go well when we do.

COVID-19 is serious, a highly contagious disease that can be, and is, fatal, though in only about 1% of the cases. Hospitalization rates are much higher than that.

But the damage being done to our constitutional rights is far, far greater. The precedent being set, that government can set down rules which would otherwise be unconstitutional because of some ’emergency’ simply leaves it to elected officials to decide just what emergencies outweigh our constitutional rights. Many are already wanting to abridge our constitutional rights under the Second Amendment because some bad people are wrongly using firearms. The New York Times published an OpEd by Parker Malloy, himself a male who thinks he is female, claiming that “Twitter’s Ban on ‘Deadnaming’ Promotes Free Speech.” There will always be such very good reasons to suspend or restrict our constitutional rights, when those rights are left for other people to decide. If the left can somehow ban ‘hate speech,’ what other speech can they ban? The McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act actually sought to ban political speech in favor of one candidate or another prior to an election, because, well just because.

Brave men fought, and died, for our rights. At least six of my known ancestors fought in our Revolution, for the rights they were denied by King George and his Parliament. At least twenty-one of my known ancestors came to these shores, risking their lives on the open ocean in small wooden ships, for the right to worship God as they chose, and not be oppressed by King James and King Charles for not being Anglicans. Can I really support governors restricting our freedom of religion over a disease far less deadly than an ocean voyage to an untamed continent in the 1620s and 1630s?[1]Fifty-one of the 102 passengers on the Mayflower either died at sea or in that first New England winter and spring.

Our great country was founded in danger, by people fleeing tyranny in England, and by brave men and women who risked their lives on the frontier, and in war, yet our political leaders today, primarily but not exclusively Democrats, would have us quaking in fear and trashing the freedoms and liberties for which our ancestors fought and died. We dishonor our ancestors when we allow their sacrifices to be wasted.
___________________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

References

References
↑1 Fifty-one of the 102 passengers on the Mayflower either died at sea or in that first New England winter and spring.
Posted on by

Andy Beshear continues to try to restrict Freedom of Religion * Updated! * Sadly, he is succeeding

As we previously noted, federal Judge Gregory van Tatenhove ruled, in Danville Christian Academy v Beshear, that Governor Andy Beshear’s (D-KY) executive order closing all Kindergarten through grade 12 schools in the Commonwealth cannot be applied to private religious schools.[1]The Catholic bishops in Kentucky were not part of that lawsuit, and have decided to go along with the Governor’s order. The parochial schools had opened on time this year, ignoring Mr … Continue reading

But Governor Beshear, in his determination that his Führerbefehle not be denied, has done what he said he would do, and appealed the decision to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals:

Lexington Christian Academy plans to open Monday. Beshear appeals judge’s ruling.

By Valarie Honeycutt Spears and Jack Brammer | November 27, 2020 | 4:37 PM EST | Updated: November 28, 2020 | 12:06 AM EST

Lexington Christian Academy will open on Monday as a result of a federal court ruling allowing in-person instruction at Kentucky faith-based schools despite an order to close from Gov. Andy Beshear.

But Beshear is fighting to keep the Lexington school and others in the state closed to keep COVID-19 from spreading.

The Democratic governor has filed an emergency 45-page appeal with U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati of U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove’s decision Wednesday to grant a preliminary injunction to 17 private Christian schools that had filed against a lawsuit against Beshear’s restriction to curb the coronavirus pandemic.

In addition to that, several other religious schools that filed another federal lawsuit against the Governor, filing an amicus on behalf of the schools that initially sued Mr Beshear. That suit is also attempting to overturn the Governor’s order restricting indoor gatherings to no more than eight people, from two different households. I am happy to inform you that while our Thanksgiving dinner did have fewer than eight people, the two household limit was exceeded. No Governor, no President, no one at all has any authority to say that I cannot associate with whomever I choose, in whatever numbers we decide.

The Herald-Leader story stated that the responses to the Governor’s appeal must have been filed by 10:00 AM EST.

Churches have won in part and lost in part in their challenges to the Governor’s orders at the Sixth Circuit. Facially, unlike the recent Supreme Court decision in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v Cuomo, the Governor is not treating private or religious schools any differently than public schools; he ordered them all to close. Due to this, it is quite possible that Governor Beshear will win his appeal. The Sixth Circuit, in partially rejecting the Governor’s orders last May, did not go as far as the appellants had requested, to allow in-person church services rather than drive-in only services, saying:

The breadth of the ban on religious services, together with a haven for numerous secular exceptions, should give pause to anyone who prizes religious freedom. But it’s not always easy to decide what is Caesar’s and what is God’s — and that’s assuredly true in the context of a pandemic.

However, it should be noted that the Governor’s great concern for K-12 students isn’t quite as extensive as it appears. On Friday night, the state high school football playoffs continued. If you are an offensive guard, you will have a defensive lineman lined up across from you, his face and yours, both unmasked, just inches apart. When the ball is snapped, you will get really up close and personal, exerting yourselves, exhaling through your mouth. Social distancing is not a part of football.

If you are a quarterback or running back or receiver, the defense will be doing everything it can to hit you, to get right up into your face, to break up the blocking or tackle the runner.

If it is so very, very vital that physical contact be limited, face masks be worn, and social distancing be observed, to reduce the spread of COVID-19, why would Mr Beshear have allowed the playoffs to continue? Apparently the Governor’s concerns about the spread of the virus do not go so far as to cancel football.

Pre-kindergarten instruction has been allowed to continue, even though children that young cannot be anywhere close to as responsible as older ones to observe COVID-19 restrictions. And the state’s colleges and universities have been allowed to remain open, despite most students living away from home and parental guidance. I have previously noted, the ‘authorities’ have been very, very surprised that college students returning to college campuses have had college parties. 🙂

I would not speculate on how the Sixth Circuit might rule, but I hope that they will rule for the free exercise of religion and the right of the people peacefully to assemble.
_____________________________
Updated: Sunday, November 29, 2020 | 10:30 AM EST

Sadly, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Governor Beshear:

Federal appellate court agrees with Beshear’s order to close all Kentucky schools

By Jack Brammer and Valarie Honeycutt Spears | November 29, 2020 | 10:14 AM EST

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear was successful Sunday in getting a federal appellate court to side with him in his order to close religious schools and others in the state during a surge in the coronavirus pandemic.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati granted the Democratic governor’s request to shelve temporarily a judge’s ruling that would have allowed 17 private Christian schools to reopen. Those schools filed a lawsuit over Beshear’s restrictions and won a preliminary injunction Wednesday from U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove. . . . .

But the three-member appellate court said Sunday that Van Tatenholve’s preliminary injunction should not have been entered because the schools are unlikely to succeed.

The appellate court said it is likely to rule that Beshear’s order was “neutral and of general applicability” in that all schools were affected.

Given that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v Cuomo was largely based on the disparate and harsher treatment of churches, there was room for the Sixth Circuit to rule as it did. This might be appealed to the Supreme Court, but with an appellate court ruling that the treatment of religious schools was no different than the treatment of secular ones, the Court would have to decide the case on the constitutional grounds of a restriction on the free exercise of religion and the right of peaceable assembly. Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion was heavily based on the disparate treatment of churches, not freedom of religion, so his vote could be lost. Justice Samuel Alito’s recent statements indicate that he would vote in favor of a constitutional argument, but this is a case in which freedom of religion and assembly could lose to the statists.
_____________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

References

References
↑1 The Catholic bishops in Kentucky were not part of that lawsuit, and have decided to go along with the Governor’s order. The parochial schools had opened on time this year, ignoring Mr Beshear’s request that in-person instruction in schools be delayed until September 28th. The bishops had earlier declined the Governor’s request — not order — that churches close down for three weeks.
Posted on by

Things for which I am thankful

I am thankful for the First Amendment to the Constitution, which protects my rights to say what I want and publish what I want. I am thankful for our First Amendment protection of our right to freely practice our faith. And I am thankful for Federal Judge Gregory van Tatenhove, appointed by the younger President George Bush, who understands that the First Amendment actually means what it says.

On May 8, 2020, Judge van Tatenhove ruled that Governor Andy Beshear’s executive order closing churches due to concerns about spreading COVID-19 was unconstitutional, a ruling which came too late in the process, as the Governor had successfully closed the churches for eight weeks.

Well, this time he wasn’t late. From the Lexington Herald-Leader:

Judge rules Beshear cannot halt in-person classes at religious schools due to COVID-19

By Jack Brammer and Valarie Honeycutt Spears | November 25, 2020 | 8:01 PM EST

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear cannot close religious schools to help curb the coronavirus pandemic, a federal judge ruled Wednesday night.

U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove said in a 22-page order that he was granting a preliminary injunction to 17 private Christian schools that had filed a lawsuit against Beshear’s emergency restriction. He said his order would apply statewide.

He said the schools were “likely to succeed on the merits of the case.”

Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron joined the plaintiffs in the suit against Beshear and Kentucky Treasurer Allison Ball filed an amicus brief supporting the suit.

Beshear spokeswoman Crystal Staley said in an email the governor has appealed the decision to the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Well, of course he has!

There’s a lot more at the link, including not only the Governor’s protest of the decision, but the comments of the schools, and First Liberty Institute‘s Chris Freund, the firm which represented the Christian schools.

“We are disappointed but not surprised that Judge Van Tatenhove, for the second time, has refused to acknowledge the U.S. Supreme Court decision that found an action like this is both legal and constitutional,” said Staley.

“We have already appealed to the Sixth Circuit and will request an emergency stay of the judge’s order, and, if necessary, will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Let’s be clear: lives are on the line and everyone must do their part to defeat the virus.”

Judge van Tatenhove noted that the Governor’s order closed all K-12 schools, even though it allowed colleges in the Commonwealth to remain open. The suing schools noted that they had spent considerable sums in reconfiguring classes and providing safety equipment to meet the PPE and social distancing requirements the Commonwealth has specified for other places to continue to meet and do business.

“The Governor has every right to impose some restrictions on all schools, religious and secular alike,” said Van Tatenhove. “Social distancing, face masks, limits on class size, reporting requirements and other protocols may cost money and may be inconvenient for parents and students, but we give executives increased discretion in time of crisis.

“But in an effort to do the right thing to fight the virus, the Governor cannot do the wrong thing by infringing protected values.”

That is the part that so many public officials have forgotten. Nothing in American law supersedes the Constitution, and our constitutionally protected rights.

I am thankful that I was born an American citizen, that we have a strict Constitution which recognizes our rights, not just as Americans, but as human beings. Citizens of other countries mostly do not have such protections.

And I am thankful for our Freedom of Peaceable Assembly, which allows my family to gather for this Thanksgiving Day, in a setting which will violate the Governor’s orders.
__________________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

Posted on by

There are times that I wonder if today’s Democrats see George Orwell’s 1984 not as a warning but a model of good government.

As we have previously noted, Governor Andy Beshear (D-KY) imposed a three week, possibly renewable, ban on indoor dining at restaurants. Los Angeles, Chicago and foul, fetid, fuming, foggy, filthy Philadelphia have all banned indoor dining, and Philly imposed new restrictions on outside dining as well.

Well, LA has gone a step further. From the Los Angeles Times:

L.A. County suspends outdoor dining at restaurants as coronavirus surges

By Alex Wigglesworth, Matt Hamilton and Jenn Harris | November 22, 2020 | 3:29 PM PST | Updated: 9:19 PM PST

In a devastating blow to Los Angeles’ struggling restaurant and hospitality industry, L.A. County public health officials on Sunday announced they will suspend outdoor dining at restaurants amid a surge of new coronavirus cases.

Few segments of Southern California’s economy have been hit harder by the pandemic than the once-booming dining world, with many landmark establishments closing in recent months and many more on the brink. After they were forced to shut indoor dining rooms in the spring, many eateries got a lifeline when officials allowed them to serve outdoors, often in patio areas and makeshift dining halls set up in parking lots, sidewalks and streets.

The new rule takes effect at 10 p.m. Wednesday and restricts restaurants — along with breweries, wineries and bars — to takeout and delivery only for the first time since May. It will remain in place for at least three weeks, officials said. Wineries and breweries can continue retail operations.

Warm weather Los Angeles is a great place for outside dining, if you don’t mind the automobile fumes too much, anyway, much better than in the impending winter weather in most of the country. But, not to worry, now LA is going to suffer just as much as Philadelphia. Mayor Jim Kenney (D-Philadelphia) won’t have to completely shut down outdoor dining in the City of Brotherly Love; evening temperatures in the thirties and forties will do that for him.

Diner: Waiter, could I have another glass of water.

Waiter: Is your glass empty, sir?

Diner: No, it’s frozen.

But, if the ban on outdoor dining doesn’t run the Los Angeles restaurants out of business, the county is preparing to do more to them:

Officials have urged residents to stay home as much as possible for the next two to three weeks to curb the rising tide of infections and avoid overwhelming the healthcare system.

L.A. County could face even stricter rules to stem the spread of the virus if the average number of new daily coronavirus cases over a five-day period continues to rise and tops 4,500, or if hospitalizations grow to more than 2,000, officials said.

In that event, officials plan to impose a three-week stay-at-home order that would permit only essential workers and those procuring essential services to leave their homes.

“Essential workers,” huh? That means who work at jobs that other people find essential. The apparently quaint notion that working to put food on the table and a roof over their heads is essential to everybody who works doesn’t appear to penetrate the consciousness of the rulemakers.

Doug Rankin, chef at Bar Restaurant in Silver Lake, said that outdoor dining had helped the restaurant break even over the last few months, generating enough to carry it through the year and ensure staffers kept their jobs.

Rankin planned to pivot entirely to takeout. He said that the entire service staff had already been laid off and that kitchen staff would be scaled down immediately.

Mayor Eric Garcetti (D-Los Angeles), with a salary of $248,000 per year and a net worth of $3,000,000, doesn’t have to worry about the ever-increasing restrictions will put him out on the street, doesn’t have to be concerned with being able to put food on the table, so it’s just so easy for him to have put the “entire service staff” of the Bar Restaurant out of work. It’s for their own good, don’t you know, as though eventual homelessness won’t be any big thing.

Many in the hospitality industry shared the sense that their businesses were being scapegoated, and they worried that the closure of outdoor dining would push L.A. County residents to gather at homes, where adherence to safety measures would be inconsistent or absent.

Governors Kate Brown (D-OR) and Tim Walz (D-MN) have already asked neighbors to spy on neighbors are report any violations of COVID-19 regulations. If Mayor Garcetti or Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA), net worth $10 million, most recently famous for his attendance at a maskless dinner at the hoitiest and toitiest of restaurants, get too concerned about the people misbehaving at home, count on them wanting to send the Geheime Staatspolizei to people’s homes to stamp out that, too.

There are times that I wonder if today’s Democrats don’t see George Orwell’s 1984 not as a warning but a model of good government.

Perhaps if I point out that many of the restaurant staff who will lose their jobs are illegal immigrants, Mr Garcetti will yield and let them go back to work, rather than force them to return south of the border . . . .
______________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

Posted on by

Once again, Kentuckians have to go to the federal courts to protect their constitutional rights

As we have previously noted, the Kentucky state Supreme Court sided with Governor Andy Beshear (D-KY) and agreed that he did have the authority to declare a state of emergency and issue his COVID-19 executive orders. The General Assembly, in which Republicans will have veto-proof margins in the coming session, appears to be ready to limit the Governor’s authority under Kentucky Revised Statutes section 39A, but such action cannot occur before January.

But if the state courts are now foreclosed to challenging the Governor’s actions, the federal courts are not, and two federal judges, in separate cases, granted injunctions prohibiting the Governor from “enforcing the prohibition on mass gatherings with respect to any in-person religious service which adheres to applicable social distancing and hygiene guidelines.” A three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a similar ruling.

The rulings came just two weeks before the Governor was going to graciously allow churches to reopen anyway.

But the Governor has now issued new executive orders:

  • All public and private K-12 schools will close to in-person instruction starting November 23, through the end of the semester. The only exception is for elementary schools in counties outside the red zone, which may reopen on December 7 if the school follows all guidelines.

Beginning on November 20 and lasting until December 13:

  • All restaurants and bars will close to indoor dining services. Outdoor dining is still allowed, with some limitations.
  • Gyms are limited to 33% capacity, and no group classes or indoor games are allowed. Masks are required.
  • Indoor gatherings should be limited to two families, not exceeding a total of eight people.
  • Attendance at wedding and funerals is limited to 25 people.

So it’s back to the federal courts. From the Lexington Herald-leader:

4 Lexington Christian schools, 5 others in Ky. back lawsuit against Beshear closings

By Valerie Honeycutt Spears | November 23, 2020 | 07:11 AM EST | Updated: 10:27 AM EST

Nine Kentucky Christian schools, including Lexington Christian Academy and three others in Fayette County, filed a brief Sunday night in support of a federal lawsuit against Gov. Andy Beshear‘s order stopping in-person instruction at public and private K-12 schools.

“No evidence whatsoever has linked any current increase in COVID cases to numbers in schools,” said the brief filed in U.S. District Court in Frankfort. Amicus briefs, as they are called, are often filed by those affected by court cases to which they are not parties.

“Because the religious schools believe both in the importance of their mission and the need for in-person instruction to the greatest extent possible, each of the religious schools has taken extraordinary steps and incurred significant financial expense to provide safe in-person learning during this academic year, “ the brief said.

Nevertheless, Beshear added new COVID-19 restrictions last week after the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that he can to protect the health and safety of Kentucky citizens.

Despite that ruling, Danville Christian Academy and Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron on Friday filed a federal lawsuit against Beshear, arguing that his order closing Kentucky’s schools, including private religious schools, violates the First Amendment of the Constitution and the state’s Religious Freedom and Restoration Act.

There’s more at the original.

Given Mr Beshear’s penchant for filing lawsuits to try to frustrate Governor Matt Bevin (R-KY) when Mr Beshear was state Attorney General, there’s some delicious schadenfreude that a Republican Attorney General is paying the Governor back in kind.

The obvious question is: how long will it take for these lawsuits to be resolved? Unless the court issues a temporary injunction, something the lawsuit included in its filing, a lawsuit of this nature could easily extend beyond the January 4, 2021 date at which the school closure expires. However, it is also possible that the Governor will extend the order if he believes that COVID-19 is still to rampant.

The sad thing is that Governor Beshear, who was just so eager to protect what he saw as Kentuckians’ rights when he was Attorney General has lost all sight of our rights with his COVID-19 orders. An even sadder thing is that people now have to go to court in the hope of protecting their rights, because our elected representatives sure won’t do it.