It would be an interesting legal battle. If churches are beyond the scope of state law or not. Given modern technology, in person worship is not necessary in order to maintain a congregation and worship. So they would have to make a case that their rights are unreasonably restricted. All rights are, and this has been established in the courts, subject to reasonable regulation.
“One of the things I want to do is get the churches open,” Trump told reporters Thursday on the White House lawn. “The churches are not being treated with respect by a lot of the Democrat governors. I want to get the churches open, and we’re going to take a very strong position on that very soon. … Including mosques.”
He’s not going to do anything. This is all talk intended to make his supporters think he gives a ■■■■ .
Like any other public space, they need to mask up and limit numbers and maintain social distance. Given the whole super spreader thing. I see no reason either of those are unnecessary infringements on their right to worship. Churches can increase the number of services if necessary to make up for smaller crowds. A blanket closure is an unnecessary infringement.
Here we go again…he makes a claim he can do something he likely can’t do…people will go down a rabbit hole finding every legal reason why he can’t do it and use it to bash his “dictatorial fever dreams” while crowing about how stupid he is.
When actually overriding any states’ mandates is not what Trump is up to.
How is it the media…and people here…still haven’t figured out his MO?