The Democrat Attack On The First Amendment
A Few Points Of Interest On The Democrat Attack On The First Amendment
1.The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” but most Democrat run states named religion non-essential during the pandemic. In a court case (CHRIST’S CHURCH OF MT. SPOKANE; WESTGATE CHAPEL Plaintiffs, v. JAY INSLEE, in his official capacity as Governor of Washington; ROBERT FERGUSON, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of Washington; BRET D. DAUGHERTY, in his official capacity as Adjutant General; JOHN BATISTE, in his official capacity as Chief of the Washington State Patrol; OZZIE KNEZOVICH, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Spokane County; ADAM FORTNEY, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Snohomish County, Defendants.) the plaintiff pointed out in their introduction:
1. This action challenges Governor Jay Inslee’s proclamations and guidance, which narrowly restrict indoor church services while exempting and treating more leniently comparable secular activities where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time.
2. In counties under Phase 2 of the current reopening plan, the Governor’s guidance prohibits indoor church services exceeding 25% capacity or 50 individuals, whichever is less (“Church Gathering Ban”).
3. Meanwhile, the Governor grants de facto gathering exemptions to 158 broad classifications of secular activity he designates as “essential.” These exemptions apply even when the “essential” activity is not constitutionally protected and is not essential to public health and safety, such as cannabis retail, coffee production, breweries, and wineries. These exemptions also apply even when the “essential” activity involves large groups of people gathering in close proximity for extended periods of time, such as airports and airplanes, trains, subways, company cafeterias, “big box” stores, and many office-based businesses.
4. Besides activity described as “essential,” the Governor grants exemptions and more lenient restrictions to even “non-essential” secular activity. This favorable treatment applies even when such “non-essential” activity is not constitutionally protected, and when that activity involves large groups of people gathering in close proximity for extended periods of time.
5. Under Phase 2 of the current reopening plan, only religious activity is subject to a 25% capacity limit and a numerical cap of 50 people. A more favorable 50% capacity allowance—with no numerical cap—applies for restaurants and taverns, professional offices, manufacturing facilities, real estate businesses, pet grooming businesses, tattoo parlors, barbershops, and hair or nail salons. Case 2:20-cv-00197-TOR ECF No. 7 filed 06/12/20 PageID.140 Page 2 of 27 FIRST AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT – 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
6. For over two months, Plaintiffs Christ’s Church of Mt. Spokane (“Christ’s Church”) and Westgate Chapel (“Westgate”) (collectively, “the Churches”) were unable to hold indoor worship service due to the Governor’s proclamations prohibiting in-person religious gatherings. The Churches patiently waited for the Governor to restore their First Amendment freedoms, trusting that he would prioritize constitutional rights and allow churches to resume in-person services at the earliest opportunity.
7. But that trust has been shattered. Rather than prioritize religious freedom, the Governor maligned spiritual gatherings as “COVID-19 ‘superspreader’ events,” and imposed uniquely onerous restrictions on churches while granting favorable treatment to a broad range of similar secular activity.
8. The Churches operate in counties that have proceeded to Phase 2 of the current reopening plan, yet the Church Gathering Ban restricts the Churches from holding substantive indoor services, even when such services would comply with the same capacity, social distancing, and sanitation standards that the State accepts as sufficient for comparable secular activity.
9. Regardless of the justifications the Governor may think he has for this disparate treatment, they cannot survive constitutional scrutiny. Under the Free Exercise Clause, a law is not generally applicable when it “fail[s] to prohibit nonreligious conduct that endangers” the government’s interest “in a similar or greater degree” than the prohibited religious conduct. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 542 (1993). That is exactly what the exemptions under the Governor’s orders do. (Specific state or policy?). So churches were denied the right to gather together and worship in person while bars, restaurants and other businesses were allowed to remain open.
The pandemic isn’t the only spark for Democrat states to attack religion. Multiple cases have gone before the Supreme Court related to freedom of religion recently that involved private business owners who were willing to provide services to members of the gay community but were unwilling to provide services specifically and only related to gay weddings. Democrat prosecutors took up the cases and the defendants only found relief at the Supreme Court as the state courts were willing to deny them their religious liberties. In the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the supreme court ruled in favor of maintaining the religious freedoms of the Plaintiff 7-2 with justices Kennedy, Roberts, Breyer, Alito, Kagan, Gorsuch and Thomas in majority with Ginsgurg and Sotomayor in dissent.
Here is where multiple first amendment principles overlap, “or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;”.
While freedom of speech is under attack from various groups, a more nefarious attack on freedom of speech is when the government aligns with powerful platforms of speech to alter or deny free access to that speech. Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said the administration is regularly “flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.” She further states, “We are in regular touch with these social media platforms and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff, but also members of our COVID-19 team.” The Biden administration has recently back-tracked on COVID policy in favor of a policy that they were previously attempting to censure.
Evidence of the relationship between the Democrat/Biden white house and big tech can be seen in court cases and congressional hearings. Alex Berenson has made public the discovery from the lawsuit he won against Twitter. It revealed that the Biden white house pressured Twitter to remove Berenson from their platform for reporting on COVID information that was counter to the white house narrative. In a congressional hearing, it was revealed that Facebook worked with Anthony Fauci to silence dissenting opinions on COVID vaccines and treatments. Mark Zuckerberg revealed that Facebook was influenced by the FBI to silence speech that could be harmful to the Biden campaign.
The Democrat-run Department of Homeland Security even started a Disinformation Governance Board, headed by Nina Jankowicsz, with clear instructions (that were revealed in a congressional oversight review) to crack down on media that was reporting negatively on democrats and the Biden administration. This board was so provably corrupt they were forced by congress to pause operation, and Jankowicsz was forced to resign. Whistleblowers have since revealed to congressional members the undemocratic and illegal intentions of the disinformation governance board. In a Senate judiciary hearing on the legal consequences of overturning Roe v Wade, Senator Hawley revealed that Senator Warner wrote to Google to pressure Google to shut down search results that would direct women to women’s health care clinics that did not provide abortions.
“…the right of the people peaceably to assemble,” has also been under attack by democrats.
Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Cortez are among Democrat leaders that have said publicly to shout down and intimidate conservative protesters so they can’t have their own space to peaceably protest. Kamala Harris funded a bail program along with other democrats to specifically bail out protestors arrested for violence. Many of the violent protesters were subsequently arrested as many as seven times during the same prolonged protests related to the death of George Floyd. Democrats have not acknowledged the violent and destructive protests related to the death of George Floyd other than to encourage it.
These rights are under attack by the Democrat party as a strategy. It can be seen across membership and the messaging is carried to the public by a complicit media. When Hunter Biden’s laptop was given to the FBI and then to the New York Post the response was swift and complete by big tech and corporate media. In the run up to the 2020 election the New York Post published corroborative evidence of Hunter Biden’s criminal behavior along with business dealings that tied Joe Biden to corrupt overseas dealings with China and Ukraine that clearly showed he was a foreign asset. The evidence also had a first-hand witness and business partner that publicly went on record with his own accounts to verify the information from the laptop. Adam Schiff, the highest ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, in a CNN interview with Wolf Blitzer said regarding the laptop "Well we know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin." To have lied so completely and without remorse shows the moral bankruptcy and will to do anything to secure a political outcome at all costs. The corporate media followed suit and immediately claimed Russian disinformation. This lackey media didn't acknowledge that the laptop and accompanying information were real until May of 2022, and even then wouldn't report with any enthusiasm to correct its journalistic malfeasance. If The New York Times “Paper of Record” gets so much wrong with its political reporting then what conclusions can we reasonably come to? Are they also working to push forward Democrat propaganda? Is the majority of corporate media simply bad at their job and have lost the ability to write critically? Is corporate media looking to position themselves favorably in the evolving caste system that the Democrats seem to wholly embrace? Maybe the goal of the Democrats is to so fully destroy all accuracy in history and reporting that we tune out as a population and turn over our lives wholly to their control.
In my opinion, there has never been a more important document establishing governance to enable the freedom of people than the constitution of the United States. The destruction of it will undoubtedly lead to the destruction of that freedom. George Washington said this in relation to those he vehemently disagreed with… "For if Men are to be precluded from offering their Sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of Speech may be taken away, and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter."
Comments ()