quote:
Nope.

"A community has the right to protect itself against an epidimic of disease which threatens the safety of its members."
Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905).

Zero to do with assembly. Here's the case summary:

quote:
Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that the freedom of the individual must sometimes be subordinated to the common welfare and is subject to the police power of the state.

You can argue case law in court to gain leverage for your position, but neither case you offered has any bearing on the right to assemble and worship.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by BluegrassBelle

RIP Hefty Lefty - 1981-2019

Member since Nov 2010

99595 posts

Posted on 4/26/20 at 10:49 am to BestBanker

quote:
Zero to do with assembly.

It has more so to do with ensuring public health can override religious doctrine. Which is why we’re allowed to have compulsory vaccination laws despite religious objections if you want to enter public schools.

That said...

quote:
The First Amendment does not provide the right to conduct an assembly at which there is a clear and present danger of riot, disorder, or interference with traffic on public streets, or other immediate threat to public safety or order.[13] Statutes that prohibit people from assembling and using force or violence to accomplish unlawful purposes are permissible under the First Amendment.

Jones v. Parmley continued to establish that there is a difference in “peaceful assembly” and assembly that could be a threat to public safety.

Law Library of Congress First Amendment Link

1 ...

Report Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board