Last week, as areas of the country began reopening, United States Attorney General William Barr ordered federal prosecutors across the U.S. to identify coronavirus-related restrictions from state and local governments “that could be violating the constitutional rights and civil liberties of individual citizens.”
On Sunday, May 3, “The Justice Department… filed a statement of interest siding with a Virginia church suing the state’s governor over restrictions because of the coronavirus.”
Here are what the officials,national media and experts are saying about churches and religious freedom under local stay-at-home orders and the abuse many allege is being waged against rights found in the Constitution:
Rep. Ted Budd (R-NC) writes, “A few weeks ago, local officials in Greenville, Miss., singled out Temple Baptist Church for hosting drive-in religious services despite the state declaring churches as essential. It didn’t matter that churchgoers had their windows rolled up while listening to the sermon broadcast over the FM radio. Police officers began knocking on car windows demanding identification and issuing $500 citations. Cases of overreach like this have led Attorney General William Barr to release a memo ordering federal prosecutors across the country to take legal action against state and local directives that infringe upon individual liberties…
“This is not to say that we should threaten states and local governments’ ability to enact the policies they see fit during this pandemic. As long as actions taken do not infringe on the civil liberties of American citizens, those governments should be free to govern how they wish. However, history has repeatedly shown us that during times of fear, it’s common to see individuals in positions of power cross inappropriate and unconstitutional lines. It is our job to conduct the appropriate oversight and ensure that responses to this pandemic are measured and based on both medical expertise and the law.”
Ted Budd, Fox News
“As a matter of doctrinal constitutional law, Barr is absolutely right. Severe restrictions on individual liberties need to be justified by a compelling government interest — like fighting a pandemic. They must also be targeted (‘narrowly tailored,’ in constitutional-law speak) to achieving that compelling goal. But here is where things get a little weird: stay-at-home orders are narrowly tailored to avoiding the spread of the disease. Barr couldn’t plausibly claim otherwise…
“The Barr memo is meant to ramp up the pressure on states to reopen, and fits with Trump’s apparent electoral strategy of pressing for faster reopenings. It’s part of the Justice Department’s job to look out for citizens’ civil rights and civil liberties. It would be a bad idea to turn that high responsibility into a political tool to help the president’s reelection campaign. Especially when lives are at stake.”
Noah Feldman, Bloomberg
The Virginia church claims “unequal treatment, and it submits photographs to make the point. One of them is a recent picture of Mr. Northam at a coronavirus press briefing. At least 21 people are visible in the room. Businesses deemed essential, meanwhile, attract hundreds. The church shows a photo of a Walmart parking lot, where its lawyers counted 268 cars. Virginia’s state-run liquor stores are open and reportedly had their best March on record…
“When pressed last month about whether New Jersey’s lockdown comported with the U.S. Constitution, Governor Phil Murphy said the question was above his pay grade: ‘I wasn’t thinking of the Bill of Rights when we did this.’ We’re grateful Mr. Barr is.”
Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal
When the federal district court “denied the church’s request for preliminary relief, it said that ‘[a]lthough [professional-services] businesses may not be essential, the exception crafted on their behalf is essential to prevent joblessness.’ But, as Eric Dreiband, head of the DOJ’s civil rights division points out, for many people of faith, exercising religion is essential, especially during a crisis. Dreiband contends that Virginia ‘has offered no good reason for refusing to trust congregants who promise to use care in worship in the same way it trusts accountants, lawyers, and other workers to do the same’…
“The executive orders prohibit the church from holding a sixteen-person, socially distanced gathering in a 225-seat church but allow similar secular conduct, such as a gathering of sixteen lawyers in a large law firm conference room. Therefore, the Justice Department argues, the governor’s executive orders may constitute a violation of the church’s constitutional rights to the free exercise of religion.”
Paul Mirengoff, Power Line Blog
Similarly, Kansas Governor Laura Kelly’s “executive orders exempted 26 types of secular activities and facilities, including bars and restaurants, libraries, shopping malls, retail stores, airports, hotels, childcare facilities, manufacturing processing and distribution facilities, and office buildings. People could gather there in unlimited numbers as long as they practiced social distancing. Yet Kelly expressly excluded religious institutions from any such accommodation…
“Churches, synagogues, and mosques were categorically barred from meeting inside their dwellings. If 50 people sit in a room to talk about real estate deals, no problem. But if someone brings up John the Baptist, call the cops!… Some state and local officials are keen to impose unnecessary and unconstitutional restrictions on congregations who wish to gather together in a safe and responsible manner. That’s as dystopian as it gets. The U.S. Justice Department should do everything it can to preserve our First Amendment rights.”
Hans von Spakovsky, Washington Examiner
–Metro Voice news staff