Yesterday The Epoch Times posted an article about some recent comments by Justice Samuel Alito.
The article reports:
Associate Justice Samuel Alito said on Sunday that he was “not surprised” by the reaction to comments he made last year about state restrictions in response to the CCP virus pandemic.
Alito, 70, told a Federalist Society virtual convention last November that he thought the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic serves as a “sort of constitutional stress test.” He argued that America has “never before seen restrictions as severe, extensive, and prolonged as those experienced for most of 2020” and raised concerns over their impact on individuals’ civil liberties.
The rare public address garnered mixed reactions from lawyers, with some criticizing him for engaging in what they say is political speech.
That’s not political speech–that is honesty.
The article cites one example of a situation that he had previously written an opinion on for the Supreme Court:
Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley, a Nevada church, sued Gov. Steve Sisolak, claiming that his order placed an unfair limit on churches compared to casinos, restaurants, and amusement parks. The order restricted the number of attendees at churches to 50 while allowing other businesses to operate at half capacity.
The court in a 5-4 rejected the church’s request to lift the restriction, prompting dissenting opinions from conservative-leaning justices.
“The Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion. It says nothing about the freedom to play craps or blackjack, to feed tokens into a slot machine, or to engage in any other game of chance. But the Governor of Nevada apparently has different priorities,” Alito wrote in his dissent. He was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored his own separate dissent.
The article concludes:
He also warned about the possibility of abuse when officials are afforded significant discretion, adding that “simply slapping on” the label of “emergency” cannot be a ground for “abrogating our most fundamental rights.”
“And whenever fundamental rights are restricted, the Supreme Court and other courts cannot close their eyes,” Alito said.
His comments came at a time when state officials and courts are facing challenges as they navigate the uncharted waters of the pandemic. Many states, in particular states with Democratic leadership, saw extensive lockdowns and restrictions, which were put in place to mitigate the spread of the CCP virus. However, critics argue that some measures significantly impeded constitutional rights and civil liberties, and at times were applied in an unbalanced way.
There have been a lot of restrictions placed on Americans due to Covid. Some of those restrictions make sense, some don’t. Masks may be of some value, but the material of the mask does not have the filtering capacity to filter out the coronavirus germs. So why is there a mask mandate? Why is there now a policy being put in place requiring masks on all public transportation? Why are you more likely to catch Covid in a church than in a gambling casino? We have reached the theater of the absurd.