A most welcome directive from AG Barr.
In prior Memoranda, I directed our prosecutors to prioritize cases against those seeking to illicitly profit from the pandemic, either by hoarding scarce medical resources to sell them for extortionate prices, or by defrauding people who are already in dire circumstances due to the severe problems the pandemic has caused. We have pursued those efforts vigorously and will continue to do so. Now, I am directing each of our United States Attorneys to also be on the lookout for state and local directives that could be violating the constitutional rights and civil liberties of individual citizens.
As the Department of Justice explained recently in guidance to states and localities taking steps to battle the pandemic, even in times of emergency, when reasonable and temporary restrictions are placed on rights, the First Amendment and federal statutory law prohibit discrimination against religious institutions and religious believers. The legal restrictions on state and local authority are not limited to discrimination against religious institutions and religious believers. For example, the Constitution also forbids, in certain circumstances, discrimination against disfavored speech and undue interference with the national economy. If a state or local ordinance crosses the line from an appropriate exercise of authority to stop the spread of COVID19 into an overbearing infringement of constitutional and statutory protections, the Department of Justice may have an obligation to address that overreach in federal court.
I am therefore directing the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Eric Dreiband, and Matthew Schneider; the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, to oversee and coordinate our efforts to monitor state and local policies and, if necessary, take action to correct them. They should work not only with all Department ofJustice offices and other federal agencies, but with state and local officials as well.
Many policies that would be unthinkable in regular times have become commonplace in recent weeks, and we do not want to unduly interfere with the important efforts of state and local officials to protect the public. But the Constitution is not suspended in times of crisis. We must therefore be vigilant to ensure its protections are preserved, at the same time that the public is protected.
Excellent, stirring words, to be sure—but can he (or will he) make them stick?
“will he” is the question.
In an Emergency restrictions should be applied evenly and also not place undue stress on our Rights.
It might have been a good idea in NYC to suspend religious congregation. It was a real Emergency Epidemic there.
Not here in NC.
Plus it was definitely not ok to apply it one religion and not others or even atheist gatherings. Allowances should have been made for things like Funerals and Weddings though and once again IN Emergency Zones like NYC.
I think someone could write a book about the overreach of declaring something an Emergency situation with no more deaths than basic Flu and nowhere close to the overwhelming of the hospital Systems. Then it could delve into the unevenness of the application of the Emergency Edicts against some groups over others. Finally it could highlight the blatant overreach in edicts that were enforced that had no practical application to the mitigation of the effects of the WuFlu.