In Re Covid-Related Restrictions On Religious Services

Facts

The World Health Organization declared that the COVID-19 outbreak constituted a global pandemic. Two days later, on March 13, D issued a 'Declaration of a State of Emergency for the State of Delaware Due to a Public Health Threat.' D issued the Emergency Declaration in accordance with powers granted to him under Title 20, Chapter 31 of the Delaware Code (the 'Emergency Management Chapter'). The Chapter provides that 'D may issue, amend and rescind all necessary executive orders, emergency orders, proclamations, and regulations, which shall have the force and effect of law.' The Chapter permits D to 'take such other actions as D reasonably believes necessary to help maintain life, health, property or public peace.' On April 1, 2020, D issued the 'Ninth Modification' which reduced the number of people permitted to gather from fifty to ten. Religious organizations were 'permitted to remain open but must comply with all CDC guidelines for safe social distancing, including a requirement to limit gatherings to no more than ten people.' D encouraged drive-in services. A House of Worship had to adhere strictly to social distancing guidelines recommended by the CDC and the Division of Public Health. (Reverend Dr. Christopher Bullock challenged restrictions that the Governor (D) imposed on houses of worship during the COVID-19 pandemic. Two religious leaders (Ps) have challenged restrictions that the Governor (D) imposed on houses of worship during the COVID-19 pandemic (the 'Challenged Restrictions'). Ps initially sought a TRO. On May 29, 2020, the District Court denied the motion for a TRO. The District Court noted that the relief Bullock had requested was more restrictive than the then-operative Reopening Worship Guidance. Bullock had not established a threat of imminent, irreparable harm that requires a TRO to maintain the status quo pending a hearing on a preliminary injunction. At the time, Bullock had identified the three sources: '(1) the requirement that preachers wear a mask while preaching; (2) the requirement that the pastor (or anyone else) not hold a person during the course of a person's baptism; and (3) certain requirements that relate to the preparation and distribution of communion.' The District Court found that there was no reason to think that any of these events needed to take place imminently and that Bullock did not face irreparable harm from having to preach for a short period wearing a mask. On May 30, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the denial of the TRO. A settlement was reached with Bullock. On December 1, 2021, Pastor Alan Hines and Reverend David W. Landow filed separate complaints. The restrictions initially were quite strict. As the state of scientific knowledge progressed, and particularly after the arrival of vaccines, D relaxed the Restrictions. The Restrictions were lifted in June 2020, more than two years ago. Ps contend that they suffered harm. Ps interpret the Delaware Constitution as imposing an absolute ban on any interference by a government official in the free exercise of religious worship. Ps claim that the Restrictions violated their rights under the state constitution and implicated their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, triggering strict scrutiny. Ps argue that the Restrictions cannot survive strict scrutiny and seek (1) a declaration that certain of the Restrictions were unconstitutional, (2) a permanent injunction prohibiting D from implementing similar restrictions in the future, and (3) nominal damages of one dollar from D in his individual capacity, plus undefined compensatory damages. D has moved to dismiss the case claiming that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the Ps' claims.

Issues

Rule of Law

Holding and Decision

Legal Analysis

© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.