More Petitions From The Persistent Widow

This week, a large Los Angeles area Evangelical church sued local authorities and the state for violation of US First Amendment rights, while another moved up a rung in the appeals process toward the US Supreme Court.

Both actions are based on a new set of facts vis-a-vis the appeals that were only partially successful in May -- since then, civil authorities have created a de facto First Amendment exception to allow BLM protestors to demonstrate without following social distancing rules, even though the free exercise clause should have allowed churches the same exception.

Another new ingredient in the current circumstances is that the two churches, as well as the Godspeak Chapel in Thousand Oaks, are practicing civil disobedience, holding indoor services without masks or social distancing, and including singing, in violation of state and local orders. This adds the conundrum of enforcement for local authorities. If they arrest or fine attendees, they create martyrs of ordinary churchgoers and pastors.

In addition, arrests and fines increase the contrast between the treatment of churchgoers and BLM protestors. They'll also inevitably bring the issue into the public eye, as well as creating friction between the local authorities and the highly influential police unions. So far, none of the local authorities has moved to enforce.

In July, I covered the case of Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena, CA, which is conducting indoor services and Bible study groups in defiance of state and local COVID orders. Liberty Counsel, one of two public interest law firms that has had partial success with recent cases, is pursuing this case. This week, it lost its initial motion for a restraining order at the district level, but will make an immediate appeal.

The lawsuit challenges both the total ban on in-person worship (including in private homes) in the counties on the “County Monitoring List,” and the ban on singing and chanting in the remaining counties. In addition to in-person worship at Harvest Rock Church, the church also has many “Life Groups,” which are home Bible studies and fellowship groups. These too are now prohibited under Gov. Newsom’s recent orders. Yet while he discriminates against churches and houses of worship, including home Bible study and fellowship meetings, Gov. Newsom continues to encourage thousands of protestors to gather throughout the state.

Also this week, another of the public-interest law firms involved in religious freedom issues, The Thomas More Society, filed suit against the State of California on behalf of Pastor John MacArthur and the Grace Community Church in Sun Valley:

The complaint states that the American people have begun to see that they are being cheated by their own government. “They have witnessed how the onerous restrictions imposed on them by public officials to allegedly fight the COVID-19 pandemic simply do not apply to certain, favored groups. When many went to the streets to engage in ‘political protests’ against ‘racism’ and ‘police brutality,’ these protestors refused to comply with the pandemic restrictions. Instead of enforcing the public health orders, public officials were all too eager to grant a de facto exception for these favored protestors.”

In addition,

In Minnesota, a lawsuit was filed Thursday in federal court challenging Gov. Tim Walz’s executive orders requiring 6-foot social distancing and the wearing of face masks at worship services.

“Gov. Walz, a former teacher, gets an F in religious liberties,” said Erick Kaardal, special counsel for the Thomas More Society. “Other states, including Texas, Illinois and Ohio, have excluded churches from COVID-19 mask mandates.”

The Thomas More website adds,

The complaint asks the court to declare Minnesota’s combination of executive orders regarding social distancing and mask-wearing at church to be unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

Kaardal added, “We are also seeking a pronouncement that Walz’s Executive Orders violate the Minnesota Constitution’s Article III separation of powers provision. Walz is exercising pure legislative law-making power—a thing only the legislature can constitutionally do. In particular, we seek an injunction against Executive Order 20-74, which mandates social distancing during religious worship, and Executive Order 20-81, which requires face masks and conflicts with existing Minnesota laws outlawing the wearing of face masks.”

This argument is especially important, since the current COVID restrictions rely on a shaky combination of state and local laws, emergency orders, and voluntary compliance that is less and less enforceable as the months wear on.

But again, we're dealing with the Parable of the Persistent Widow.