Author Topic: Lawsuits Alleging Religious Discrimination - Covid 19 (Read 9821 times)

S209 · « **Reply #20 on:** May 24, 2020, 01:34:32 AM »

Quote from: KSMH on May 24, 2020, 01:32:14 AM

There is a possibility it was politically motivated, I dont know the details, but there have been many outdoor minyanim in LKWD that were allowed, yet an outdoor fire not. I dont know all the details but dont take police statements at face value. I dont want to go off topic but I wrote the wrote MIGHT due to other reasons.

Someone reported it and he fought with them strenuously when they came to shut it down

KSMH · « **Reply #21 on:** May 24, 2020, 01:44:02 AM »

Quote from: aygart on May 24, 2020, 12:57:33 AM

The quick answer to anyone discussing 1A challenges to bans on gatherings is that there is a very easily defensible need for blanket bans on gatherings and that it is perfectly consistent with 1A to include religious gatherings in that ban. The only thing which makes it start getting confusing is if there are other gatherings allowed. Allowing people into stores and the like is not included in that.

Some would argue, the Constitution gives us the right of freedom of religion, even if other gatherings are not allowed.

To stop religious gatherings, more then one criteria needs to be met.

There needs to be reasoning with scientific backing to close religious gatherings. It would be hard to sue based on this, meaning, to get a temporary injunction and have the lawsuit move into to discovery phase. Because there are no hard facts in the actual lawsuit to legally warrant so.

That's why, its possible they are being sued based on other hard facts which do have legal ground for for a temporary injunction.

ari3 · « **Reply #22 on:** May 24, 2020, 01:47:50 AM »

Quote from: S209 on May 24, 2020, 01:34:32 AM

Someone reported it and he fought with them strenuously when they came to shut it down

I think he purposely wanted to get arrested to demonstrate the violation of his rights

aygart · « **Reply #23 on:** May 24, 2020, 01:54:20 AM »

Quote from: KSMH on May 24, 2020, 01:44:02 AM

Some would argue, the Constitution gives us the right of freedom of religion, even if other gatherings are not allowed.

To stop religious gatherings, more then one criteria needs to be met.

There needs to be reasoning with scientific backing to close religious gatherings. It would be hard to sue based on this, meaning, to get a temporary injunction and have the lawsuit move into to discovery phase. Because there are no hard facts in the actual lawsuit to legally warrant so.

That's why, its possible they are being sued based on other hard facts which do have legal ground for for a temporary injunction.

Yes I know that it needs to demonstrate need and that the regulation I is the only way to accomplish it among other things, but those are fairly easy to show in this case and the courts are almost certain to defer to state health departments. Other than this, people can make the arguments they want but there are already rulings from SCOTUS otherwise.

KSMH · « **Reply #24 on:** May 24, 2020, 02:07:40 AM »

Quote from: aygart on May 24, 2020, 01:54:20 AM

Yes I know that it needs to demonstrate need and that the regulation I is the only way to accomplish it among other things, but those are fairly easy to show in this case and the courts are almost certain to defer to state health departments. Other than this, people can make the arguments they want but there are already rulings from SCOTUS otherwise.

There will be a push by many especially in light of the nursing home scandals to get all inner government workings, studies and thoughts published.

There will be many actions taken by government that will have proved to be unjustified, like stopping drive thru ceremonies ETC.

Think 1793 Philadelphia yellow fever epidemic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1793_Philadelphia_yellow_fever_epidemic?wprov=sfla1

I don't think it'll be easy for the government to prove their actions were and continue to be justifiable, I just dont think so. Health departments cannot always justify their actions and governments cant either, sometimes it takes a Judge with courage to even whilst amid this pandemic question and limit government.

I guess if it it moves to discovery we will find out.

aygart · « **Reply #25 on:** May 24, 2020, 02:13:19 AM »

Quote from: KSMH on May 24, 2020, 02:07:40 AM

There will be a push by many especially in light of the nursing home scandals to get all inner government workings, studies and thoughts published.

There will be many actions taken by government that will have proved to be unjustified, like stopping drive thru ceremonies ETC.

Think 1793 Philadelphia yellow fever epidemic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1793_Philadelphia_yellow_fever_epidemic?wprov=sfla1

I don't think it'll be easy for the government to prove their actions were and continue to be justifiable, I just dont think so. Health departments cannot always justify their actions and governments cant either, sometimes it takes a Judge with courage to even whilst amid this pandemic question and limit government.

I guess if it it moves to discovery we will find out.

Drive through was probably unjustified and that is a n example of where DOJ got involved.

aygart · « **Reply #26 on:** May 24, 2020, 02:21:36 AM »

Quote from: KSMH on May 24, 2020, 02:07:40 AM

There will be a push by many especially in light of the nursing home scandals to get all inner government workings, studies and thoughts published.

There will be many actions taken by government that will have proved to be unjustified, like stopping drive thru ceremonies ETC.

Think 1793 Philadelphia yellow fever epidemic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1793_Philadelphia_yellow_fever_epidemic?wprov=sfla1

I don't think it'll be easy for the government to prove their actions were and continue to be justifiable, I just dont think so. Health departments cannot always justify their actions and governments cant either, sometimes it takes a Judge with courage to even whilst amid this pandemic question and limit government.

I guess if it it moves to discovery we will find out.

Not sure what you want from yellow fever

KSMH · « **Reply #27 on:** May 24, 2020, 02:24:22 AM »

Quote from: aygart on May 24, 2020, 02:13:19 AM

Drive through was probably unjustified and that is a n example of where DOJ got involved.

I mentioned the simplest example so that you'll agree LOL,

The DOJ didn't get involved in NJ and while they were not mentioned as illegal , they were not mentioned as allowed and some would argue that's because officially everyone was supposed to STAY AT HOME [if not a knucklehead] so it was not legal. Murphy only last week started allowing religious drive thru...

I meant many more orders then just drivethru's.

aygart · « **Reply #28 on:** May 24, 2020, 02:26:10 AM »

Quote from: KSMH on May 24, 2020, 02:24:22 AM

I mentioned the simplest example so that you'll agree LOL,

The DOJ didn't get involved in NJ and while they were not mentioned as illegal , they were not mentioned as allowed and some would argue that's because officially everyone was supposed to STAY AT HOME [if not a knucklehead] so it was not legal. Murphy only last week started allowing religious drive thru...

I meant many more orders then just drivethru's.

A blanket against gatherings without a religious exception is what matters.

PlatinumGuy · « **Reply #29 on:** May 24, 2020, 03:34:48 AM »

Wishful thinking. Scotus already ruled on this.

CountValentine · « **Reply #30 on:** May 24, 2020, 08:04:24 AM »

Trying to say it is an essential service is going to be a hard sell.

ari3 · « **Reply #31 on:** May 25, 2020, 07:29:26 PM »

https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/05/25/california-reopens-churches-3-days-after-trump-threatened-to-override-states-1286396

the lawsuits together with the pressure from Trump is starting to have an effect

Jellybelly · « **Reply #32 on:** May 25, 2020, 07:32:14 PM »

Quote from: ari3 on May 25, 2020, 07:29:26 PM

https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/05/25/california-reopens-churches-3-days-after-trump-threatened-to-override-states-1286396

the lawsuits together with the pressure from Trump is starting to have an effect

That’s for sure! Even Murphy’s feeling the heat

YitzyS · « **Reply #33 on:** May 25, 2020, 07:56:37 PM »

Am I the only one bothered by the fact that the word alleging in the thread's title is spelled so wrong?

CountValentine · « **Reply #34 on:** May 25, 2020, 08:56:10 PM »

Quote from: ari3 on May 25, 2020, 07:29:26 PM

the lawsuits together with the pressure from Trump is starting to have an effect

Trumps toothless political stunt has nothing to do with it.

justaregularguy · « **Reply #35 on:** May 25, 2020, 11:28:29 PM »

Sorry for interrupting here-can someone correct the spelling in the thread title please... 👍

YitzyS · « **Reply #36 on:** May 26, 2020, 12:00:47 AM »

Quote from: justaregularguy on May 25, 2020, 11:28:29 PM

Sorry for interrupting here-can someone correct the spelling in the thread title please... 👍

Yes @Mods @Something Fishy

KSMH · « **Reply #37 on:** May 26, 2020, 12:04:23 AM »

Quote from: YitzyS on May 25, 2020, 07:56:37 PM

Am I the only one bothered by the fact that the word alleging in the thread's title is spelled so wrong?

Ouch.

Something Fishy · « **Reply #38 on:** May 26, 2020, 12:26:28 AM »

Quote from: YitzyS on May 26, 2020, 12:00:47 AM

Yes @Mods @Something Fishy

Fixed it

yesitsme · « **Reply #39 on:** May 26, 2020, 01:32:52 AM »

https://twitter.com/OneJerseySchorr/status/1265116970028077063