The County of Butler, PA vs Tom Wolf

[Youth Hockey Info]

A first in many different attempts at removing tyrannical powers from governor Tom Wolf, a win for the people.



BUTLER COUNTY, Pa. — A judge ruled in favor of several local counties in a federal lawsuit filed against Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf and Secretary of Health Dr. Rachel Levine over COVID-19 restrictions on gatherings and orders to close all “non-life-sustaining” businesses.

This story will be updated as details emerge.

https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/covid-19-restrictions-by-gov-wolf-dr-levine-unconstitutional-judge-rules/

<a href="https://www.youthhockeyinfo.com/cobvw.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.youthhockeyinfo.com/cobvw.pdf</a>

The McShane Firm LLC.

FEDERAL JUDGE STRICKLAND ENDS WOLF EMERGENCY POWERS in very large part. Although the judge found the congregate gathering component, the stay at home, and the business closure components as to the specific plaintiffs is unconstitutional, it should be read that similarly situated folks would "win" as well.
***********************************
SO WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Unless Governor Wolf gets a stay from the judge or gets a stay from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, this is the current law of the land effective immediately. So, the congregate gathering ban issued by the SOE and the DOH are unconstitutional and cannot be enforced. The business closure and restriction aspects of the SOE and DOH are likewise unconstitutional and cannot be enforced. Although there are no stay-at-home orders in effect in PA, they too are unconstitutional and cannot be re-introduced.

Other aspects, specifically the masks restrictions, are untouched.
***********************************
The judge in his opinion narrowly crafted it for relief as to the particular plaintiffs involved, but given the type and kind of folks involved, it should apply universally.

Declaratory judgment was issued in favor of the political plaintiffs, and business plaintiffs, but the county litigants were dismissed because they lack standing as creatures of the state and do not have inherent rights under the PA and fed constitution as they are a creation of the state.

For law geeks the judge held that ordinary constitutional scrutiny applied as opposed to lesser emergency regime.

Specifically, the First Amendment claims were held to be intermediate scrutiny because they apply across the board and are content neutral (content-neutral regulations of speech). And that although the government has an undoubted compelling interest in fighting against community spread of CoVID 19, the congregate gather bans are not the least restrictive mans to do so. Therefore it is unconstitutional.

We are still evaluating Federal Judge William Stickman IV's declaratory judgment against Governor Wolf and the impact it has statewide, but here are some preliminary points:

The declaratory judgment says "(1) that the congregate gathering limits imposed by defendants' mitigation orders violate the right of assembly enshrined in the First Amendment; (2) that the stay-at-home and business closure components of defendants' orders violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; and (3) that the business closure components of Defendants' orders violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."

In his written opinion, Stickman noted that the Wolf administration's actions "were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency," but that "even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered."

"The liberties protected by the Constitution are not fair-weather freedoms -- in place when times are good but able to be cast aside in times of trouble," Stickman wrote. "There is no question that this country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort. But the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment. The constitution cannot accept the concept of a 'new normal' where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures.

"Rather, the Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency. Actions taken by defendants crossed those lines. It is the duty of the court to declare those actions unconstitutional."

We are still awaiting a fax of the filed opinion and order. Standby for more.

[Guest]

Tom Wolf is a full fledged retard I’m sorry.

[Guest]

and he said unto the pharoah, "let my people go"

PA Governor's COVID-19 Restrictions Ruled Unconstitutional By Federal Judge |

Ok, DVHL and NJYHL, grow a pair.

[Guest]

The Aaha has to go first.

[Guest]

1) Trump appointed judge rules against safety restrictions. Is there really any surprise here.

2) Ruling for Butler, Greene, Washington and Fayette counties only. Who knows where these counties are at.

3) Occupancy ruling was not challenged, so that stays in place.

4) Appeal process will take months and judges decision will be overturned if heard in another county.

Actually does nothing to change standing rule/s, so I guess feel free to yip yap about changes at your local rink. You still have to abide by Wolf's order.

The actions taken by the administration were mirrored by governors across the country and saved, and continue to save lives in the absence of federal action.

Maybe if Trump and the GOP spent more time initiating early response and early restrictions vs doctoring CDC facts and hiding the truth, we would not be in the mess we currently stand in.

[Guest]

"The actions taken by the administration were mirrored by governors across the country and saved, and continue to save lives in the absence of federal action."

Penna, nj, del, ny, mi and ca all mirrored each other. Any surprise they have the most dead? They sent people to their deaths. Mandatory death sentenses for nursing home patients.

[Guest]

Which report were you reading concerning death toll and infection rates? The edited Trump version or the actual CDC report which was not permitted to be released?

[Guest]

"Maybe if Trump and the GOP spent more time initiating early response and early restrictions vs doctoring CDC facts and hiding the truth, we would not be in the mess we currently stand in."

you mean instead of dicking around in congress with a bogus impeachment?

go get your shine box

[Guest]

1) Trump appointed judge rules against safety restrictions. Is there really any surprise here.

2) Ruling for Butler, Greene, Washington and Fayette counties only. Who knows where these counties are at.

3) Occupancy ruling was not challenged, so that stays in place.

4) Appeal process will take months and judges decision will be overturned if heard in another county.

Actually does nothing to change standing rule/s, so I guess feel free to yip yap about changes at your local rink. You still have to abide by Wolf's order.

The actions taken by the administration were mirrored by governors across the country and saved, and continue to save lives in the absence of federal action.

Maybe if Trump and the GOP spent more time initiating early response and early restrictions vs doctoring CDC facts and hiding the truth, we would not be in the mess we currently stand in.

Wow, you really didn't read any part of the opinion and have no clue how courts operate. No, the decision is not limited to those three counties, the motion to dismiss as to the counties was actually granted for lack of standing. The 25/250 person limit was challenged and ruled unconstitional. This is a ruling by a federal court, and cannot be reviewed by a court in "another county". The only court that can review this decision is the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Without supersedeas, the ruling takes immediate effect, who cares how long the appeal takes.

[Guest]

Unless, of course, the PA Governor gets a stay pending appeal.