Legal Challenges to Covid 19 Restrictionsngocthanh
Munza v. Ivey: On August 11, 2020, Judge Greg Griffin of Montgomery County Circuit Court dismissed a lawsuit against Alabama Governor Kay Ivey (R) to require the wearing of face masks to curb the spread of COVID-19. In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that the mask requirement was enacted in violation of the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act (AAPA). The plaintiffs alleged that the Alabama Board of Health failed to comply with legal requirements for notification and administrative verification before issuing the mask warrant. Accordingly, the applicants argued that the order was “nothing more than an expression and does not carry the weight of the law and cannot be valid or effective against any person or party until due process is followed.” In their request for rejection, state officials argued that the plaintiffs had wrongly questioned the legal basis for the mask requirement. They argued that the applicants` allegations were unfounded because Ivey had included the order in a statement by the Governor under its own authority under the Emergency Management Act. After hearing oral arguments, Griffin dismissed the case without explanation from the bank.    Harvest Rock Church, Inc. v. Newsom: On July 17, 2020, a group of California churches filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, seeking an injunction against Governor Gavin Newsom`s (D) COVID-19 restrictions on indoor worship. In their complaint, the churches challenged Executive Order N-33-20, Public Health Guidance, and Guidance for Places of Worship, arguing that these guidelines unconstitutionally restricted gatherings for indoor worship and Bible study at home. Under these guidelines, personal services were only allowed if certain measures, including social distancing and the use of masks, were followed.
The number of participants was limited to 25% of the capacity of the building with a maximum of 100 participants. In addition, the guidelines suggested stopping singing and singing indoors as they “present an increased likelihood of transmission [of Covid-19] through contaminated exhaled droplets.” According to the churches, these restrictions violate their rights to freedom of assembly, expression and religion. The churches sought a court order “preventing the plaintiffs, their pastors and parishioners from subjecting them to criminal penalties for attending, singing or singing indoor worship services that Sunday in which the plaintiffs will implement social distancing and hygiene protection on an equal footing with permitted non-religious gatherings.” The case was entrusted to John F. Walter, appointed by George W. Bush (R).  Brnovich v. Biden: On September 14, 2021, the Attorney General of Arizona filed the first legal challenge to President Joe Biden`s COVID-19 vaccination warrants for federal employees and large corporations. These were Biden`s executive orders, which required all employees of the federal executive branch and all employees of contractors who do business with the federal government to be vaccinated. It also involved the Occupational Safety and Health Administration developing a rule requiring employers with 100 or more employees to require weekly COVID-19 vaccinations or tests. In his complaint, Attorney General Mark Brnovich (R) argued that Biden unconstitutionally favors undocumented immigrants, saying that “unauthorized aliens will not be subject to vaccination requirements even if they are released directly to the United States (where most will remain), while approximately one hundred million American immigrants will be subject to unprecedented vaccination requirements.” Brnovich argued that this unequal treatment violated the Fourteenth Amendment`s equality clause and suggested that the warrants reflected “an unequivocal — and unconstitutional — way of favoring unauthorized aliens.” Brnovich sought a court ruling declaring the warrants unconstitutional and an injunction prohibiting their enforcement. In a press release, Brnich said, “There can be no serious or scientific discussion about containing the spread of COVID-19 that does not begin at our southern border.” The case was filed in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Arizona County and assigned to Judge Michael Liburdi, appointed by President Donald Trump (R).   Auracle Homes, LLC v. Lamont: On June 16, 2020, a group of eight Connecticut homeowners sued Governor Ned Lamont(D) in the United States. U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, which is trying to block two executive orders issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Executive Order 7G, issued on March 19, suspends uncritical court cases. Executive Decree 7X, published on 10. April prohibits landlords from carrying out new evictions by July 1, provides an automatic 60-day grace period for April rent (and a 60-day grace period for May rent upon request), and requires landlords to allow tenants who have paid a deposit of more than one month`s rent to use that excess amount around April. Rent in May or June.
The owners argue in their complaint that these implementing regulations “unlawfully deprived them of their constitutional right to private contracts, the right to due process, the right to equal protection of the law, and the right not to expropriate their property for public use without fair compensation.” Connecticut Attorney General William Tong defended the executive orders, saying they were “very clearly constitutional and fully legally justified.” The case was assigned to Judge Victor Allen Bolden.   Nov 4 (Reuters) – Business groups, attorneys general and religious organizations have promised swift legal challenges to try to block the vaccination and testing warrant unveiled by the Biden administration on Thursday. A group of 24 Republican attorneys general warned in September that they would go to court to fight what they called an illegal warrant. Elisabeth Arenales has been Senior Health Policy Advisor to Governor Jared Polis since January 2019. Prior to working for Governor Polis, she served for twenty years as director of the health program at the Colorado Center on Law and Policy. CCLP is Colorado`s barrier-free legal services program and focuses on family economic security. Elisabeth is recognized as an expert in health policy and has a strong track record of protecting, maintaining and expanding access to health care, particularly for low-income Colorads. She has helped lead laws and programs that have increased coverage, reduced barriers to accessing health care, and led to significant changes in Colorado`s healthcare landscape. Overall, challenges to CMS`s vaccination mandate are being prepared before the courts of appeal.
But we are still far from a final word on the fate of the vaccination mandate as challenges arise.