Justice Department sides with Virginia church in dispute over lockdown orders
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Washington — The Justice Department is siding with a Virginia church challenging Governor Ralph Northam's executive orders limiting in-person gatherings during the coronavirus pandemic, which the church says unfairly applies to houses of worship and other religious institutions.
© Steve Helber / AP Virus Outbreak Virginia
Federal prosecutors submitted the statement of interest in support of Lighthouse Fellowship Church in Chincoteague Island, Virginia, on Sunday. The church filed a lawsuit in federal district court challenging Northam's orders in federal court after its pastor received a citation and summons for holding a 16-person service in early April.
Lighthouse Fellowship Church maintains that its congregants followed social distancing guidelines in the 225-seat church and personal-hygiene protocols. The church argues the orders issued by Northam violate the First Amendment by improperly restricting religious gatherings at houses of worship while allowing comparable secular gatherings to continue unimpeded.
"The United States believes that the church has set forth a strong case that the orders, by exempting other activities permitting similar opportunities for in-person gatherings of more than 10 individuals, while at the same time prohibiting churches from gathering in groups of more than 10 — even with social distancing measures and other precautions — has impermissibly interfered with the church's free exercise of religion," the Justice Department said in its filing.
"Unless the Commonwealth can prove that its disparate treatment of religious gatherings is justified by a compelling reason and is pursued through the least restrictive means, this disparate treatment violates the Free Exercise Clause, and the orders may not be enforced against the church," the department continued.
In its lawsuit, Lighthouse Fellowship Church argued that Northam's orders allow other businesses such as law or accounting firms to gather in groups of more than 10 as long as they follow social distancing measures. The church also noted large crowds at big-box retailers, as well as how social distancing guidelines have been successfully followed at Northam's own press conferences.
But on Friday, the court denied Lighthouse Fellowship Church's request to block enforcement of the orders. The church, which is represented by Liberty Counsel, appealed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Toby Heytens, Virginia's solicitor general, said in a filing Sunday the Justice Department and Lighthouse Fellowship "misconstrue the nature of Virginia's gathering ban in ways that materially impact their arguments."
"Not all executive orders issued to address the threat of COVID-19 are the same and those issued by Governor Northam do not operate in the manner plaintiff and the federal government describe," Heytens wrote.
The Justice Department's statement comes after Attorney General William Barr issued a memo to federal prosecutors to keep watch for state and local directives that could infringe upon constitutional rights and civil liberties, including measures that may discriminate against religious institutions.
"If a state or local ordinance crosses the line from an appropriate exercise of authority to stop the spread of COVID-19 into an overbearing infringement of constitutional statutory protections, the Department of Justice may have an obligation to address that overreach in federal court," Barr wrote.
The Justice Department last month filed a statement of interest in support of a Greenville, Mississippi, church that sued the town over its stay-at-home order.
[deleted advertisement].
Tags
Who is online
137 visitors
It seems logical that this large capacity church can easily seat 16 people and adhere to social distancing protocols.
This pastor needs to write his congressman rather than ignoring the law.
The Justice Department is responsible for enforcing the laws and administration of justice. It is NOT A COURT. It should not be taking sides with anybody.
Why wouldn't it side with the aggrieved? It should have left George Wallace alone - he was the law?
I predicted lawsuits when the stay at home orders started. Both the Right to Religion and the Right to Assemble were going to be challenged. I also think states, companies and people will be sued as well for negligent deaths before this is all over. Of course the GoP are working feverishly to block such law suits before they begin at the expense of the workers even though Trump thinks of himself as "The Workers' President".
The Right to Assemble is fine. But this is an unusual circumstance given the covid crisis. So now it becomes a matter of public health and whether that should (temporarily) supercede the right. But a modicum of common sense should tell people that uneccesarily assembling right now is a bad idea. Of course, there are those who lack common sense.
Lack of common sense or just plain stupidity. All of them!
Oh, I agree. Common sense would tell us that taking some basic precautions until such a time as comprehensive treatment can be implemented would be the smart play, but we all know some less than stellar intellects.
No to all. Only to a local grocery.
Indeed. You can tell when they start reacting emotionally rather than rationally.
I'd like to know which lawyers and accountants are meeting in groups?
Just asking for a friend,
Do you consider a church to be a business as that sentence implies? And there is no proof of other gatherings of any sort except....
Agreed. We could not get near Home Depot or Lowes yesterday - parking lots were filled and the lines were hundreds of yards long - spaced out approx 6 feet.
Ultimately the case boils down to the Fed's and States authority to declare a state of emergency without resorting to martial law.
Barr should be ultra careful wheres States Rights are concerned.
There are a lot of things that don't make sense. The question should be addressed to whomever wrote that rule, which I'm assuming the lawsuit does.
A slippery slope. The POTUS declared a National State of emergency in which he can suspend anything he wants including our C rights.
If churches aren't businesses then they should not be making that comparison.
Yes, they should. They also have a charge of responsibility for the safety of ALL of their citizens,
not just the religious ones.
Especially after the President tossed them the ball and challenged them to handle things.
It will be interesting to see what the Court of Appeals has to say.
There is none. I'm not sure what circumstances would require a gathering. But any meeting can be accomplished via phone or zoom.
Yes
It appears the governor had allowed some gatherings over 10, but specfied no churches... which is obviously wrong. The governor should not have made any exemptions over 10.
Constitutionally, any restriction on religious practice should be narrowly focused and the least restrictive means to achieving a compelling government interest. Simply saying people can’t go to church does seem too broad if the social distancing required of everyone else is being adhered to.