• Welcome to our new home!

    Please share any thoughts or issues here.


Amy Coney Barrett upheld Pritzker's lockdown decree.

unknown

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
9,942
https://sports.yahoo.com/court-rejects-illinois-gops-challenge-040240949.html

A federal appeals court has turned down the Illinois Republican Party’s bid to block a coronavirus-related lockdown order in that state that limits political gatherings — and most other in-person events — to no more than 50 people.

A three-judge panel that included two Trump appointees unanimously rejected the state GOP’s request for a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the order issued by Gov. J.B. Pritzker.

Lawyers for the Republican Party argued that Pritzker’s decision in June to exempt churches and other religious organizations from the cap undermined the governor’s ability to leave that limit in place against political assemblies, which also enjoy special protection under the Constitution.

But the opinion, released Thursday by the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, held that the exemption for religion Pritzker issued under some legal and political pressure from religious groups about two months ago did not foreclose the state’s ability to regulate political events as part of efforts to stem spread of the virus.

Supreme Court precedent “does not compel the Governor to treat all gatherings alike, whether they be of Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox Jews, Republicans, Democrats, University of Illinois alumni, Chicago Bears fans, or others,” wrote Judge Diane Wood, an appointee of President Bill Clinton. “Free exercise of religion enjoys express constitutional protection, and the Governor was entitled to carve out some room for religion, even while he declined to do so for other activities.”


This is the lockdown EO:

https://www2.illinois.gov/Pages/Executive-Orders/ExecutiveOrder2020-43.aspx


Here is a link to the court's opinion:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/20-2175/20-2175-2020-09-03.html#


What may be more disturbing is the case which they used to justify their decision.

Here is the quote from the judgment (page 3):

The Illinois Republican Party and some of its affiliates
(“the Republicans”) believe that the accommodation for free
exercise contained in the executive order violates the Free
Speech Clause of the First Amendment. In this action, they
seek a permanent injunction against EO43. In so doing, they
assume that such an injunction would permit them, too, to
congregate in groups larger than 50, rather than reinstate the
stricter ban for religion that some of the Governor’s earlier executive
orders included, though that is far from assured. Relying
principally on Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11
(1905), the district court denied the Republicans’ request for
preliminary injunctive relief against EO43.

"Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts
 
Last edited:
Back
Top