Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Pennsylvania judge strikes down ‘unconstitutional’ coronavirus restrictions

Many restrictions already lifted, but inconsistency in implementation highlighted by judge

Oliver O'Connell
New York
Monday 14 September 2020 14:42 EDT
Comments
Pennsylvania protests against stay-at-home order

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A federal judge has struck down Pennsylvania’s coronavirus pandemic restrictions calling them unconstitutional.

Governor Tom Wolf had implemented limits on the size of gatherings and ordered people to stay home and for “non-life-sustaining” businesses to close in an attempt to stem the spread of Covid-19 infections.

However, on Monday US District Judge William Stickman IV sided with plaintiffs that included hair salons, drive-in movie theatres, a farmer’s market vendor, a horse trainer, and several Republican officeholders who sued as individuals.

Judge Stickman, an appointee of president Donald Trump, ruled that the Wolf administration’s pandemic policies are overreaching, arbitrary and violated citizens’ constitutional rights.

The judge wrote that the governor’s decisions “were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency”, but “even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered”.

Many of the restrictions imposed by the governor have been lifted since the lawsuit was filed in May — including the stay-at-home order.

Businesses have also reopened, though capacity limits still apply and there are restrictions on alcohol sales in bars and restaurants.

Indoor events are limited to 25 people and outdoor events to 250 — it was argued in the case that this violates the First Amendment.

Judge Stickman noted that limits on crowd size did no include exceptions for protests, though they had been allowed to proceed. Governor Wolf even participated in a protest that exceeded the limits imposed on gatherings.

While verbal exceptions had been made for the protests, these were not reflected in the language of the governor’s order restricting gatherings.

The judge also pointed out that venue size had not been considered regarding indoor events and some commercial gatherings had been permitted based on percentage occupancy of a location.

In August, president Trump praised his supporters in the state as “incredible people” for defying the shutdown orders and social distancing guidelines at a campaign rally near Scranton.

A spokesperson for the governor said that they are reviewing the judge’s decision.

There have been 145,000 confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the state, and more than 7,800 officially recorded deaths.

With reporting from the Associated Press

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in