A federal judge in Pennsylvania decided the state’s lockdowns violate the 1st and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution. For many of us who have been concerned about the lockdowns since March, we can celebrate the decision while also being disappointed that it took so long for a judge to overturn the tyrannical actions in one state.
From the article I linked:
In the 66-page ruling, U.S. District Court Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania William Stickman struck down Wolf’s limits on indoor and outdoor gatherings of up 25 and 250 people, respectively. The limitations, Stickman wrote, violate “the right of assembly enshrined in the First Amendment.”
Stickman ruled that the governor’s stay-home order and mandatory closure of businesses, which were deemed non-essential to curb the spread of the novel Wuhan coronavirus, infringed on citizen freedoms and discriminated based upon arbitrary “life sustaining” and “non-life sustaining” standards breaching 14th Amendment protections.
In the ruling, Stickman said he “believes that defendants undertook their actions in a well-intentioned effort to protect Pennsylvanians from the virus. However, good intentions toward a laudable end are not alone enough to uphold governmental action against a constitutional challenge. Indeed, the greatest threats to our system of constitutional liberties may arise when the ends are laudable, and the intent is good — especially in a time of emergency.”
Stickman emphasized that once liberties erode under a public emergency, they become difficult to repossess.
“Even a vigilant public may let down its guard over its constitutional liberties only to find that liberties, once relinquished, are hard to recoup,” Stickman wrote.
It should be obvious to all people who believe in the U.S. Constitution that it is dangerous to allow governors and mayors the unfettered authority to decide which businesses may be open and which may be closed, and when people can leave their homes, and whether citizens can travel. These are the types of freedoms that the Constitution was written to protect. And it also should be obvious that the Constitution was written to protect these freedoms in difficult times, not times when it is easy to favor free speech and assembly. The correct response from the beginning was the make the lockdowns and the business closures and all other governmental actions *voluntary* and not enforceable by law.
I am happy to see a federal judge finally recognize this obvious violation of the Constitution, and I hope other federal courts follow suit.
Speaking of the lockdowns, I highly recommend that people who actually care about the data and science related to COVID-19 to please watch this video. If you favored the lockdowns — and you have an open mind — this video may change your perspective. If you opposed the lockdowns from the beginning, as I did, this video completely justifies our position.