One of the churches that had challenged Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker’s authority to restrict religious gatherings across the state in response to COVID-19 has asked a federal appeals panel to allow them to walk away from their case.
In the June 5 filing, The Beloved Church, of Lena, told the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals they believed their constitutional case had been rendered moot by Pritzker’s sudden decision to replace his mandatory restrictions on religious assemblies with public health “guidance” instead.
“… Prtizker has recognized and argued elsewhere that his new executive order moots the injunctive relief sought by churches against mandates in his prior executive order(s) (sic),” the church wrote in its brief. “Because Pritzker has unilaterally abandoned his mandates on gatherings for religious purposes, Plaintiffs’ request for temporary injunctive relief is moot.”
The request to withdraw comes a week after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a case brought by two Chicago area churches against the governor, and nearly a month since the northwest Illinois congregation became the first religious group to directly challenge Pritzker’s authority to limit the size of religious gatherings under his emergency powers.
The U.S. Supreme Court also ruled 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts joining with the high court’s progressive bloc, to uphold the power of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and, by extension, Pritzker and all other U.S. governors, to regulate and shut down church services in the name of public health, without running afoul of the U.S. Constitution.
The legal rancor has continued since Pritzker moved to extend his so-called stay at home order at the beginning of May. The order, which grouped activities and organizations into “essential” and “non-essential” categories, stood as the centerpiece of the governor’s strategy to combat the spread of COVID-19 in the state.
Pritzker initially did not include the exercise of religion among his list of essential activities, nor churches or other houses of worship among essential organizations, meaning churches were closed under the order and adherents were barred from gathering for worship and prayer services.
After the Beloved Church and its pastor, Stephen Cassell, filed suit, Pritzker moved to relax some of those rules, allowing religious congregants to gather in groups of 10 or less, and declaring religion an essential activity.
However, mounting threats of action against churches drew another legal action from two Romanian Christian congregations in Chicago and northwest suburban Niles.
All the lawsuits asserted Pritzker had overstepped his authority and trampled on the rights of religious believers under the First Amendment and federal and state religious freedom laws.
Judges, however, disagreed, saying they believed Pritzker had the power under the Constitution to regulate churches, provided he did not directly target churches alone. In this instance, federal judges said the governor did not target churches, because they said he also shut down other comparable places of large indoor assemblies, including theaters and concert halls.
The judges refused to grant the churches restraining orders they had requested to block Pritzker from enforcing his orders against churches.
The churches appealed the decisions to the Seventh Circuit.
There, a three-judge panel denied the requests of the Romanian congregations for a rare injunction, to prevent the governor from enforcing his orders while the appeal continued.
The Romanian churches then also petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court.
Before the court could act, however, Pritzker and his Illinois Department of Public Health abruptly announced they were lifting all restrictions on religious gatherings, instead replacing the orders with IDPH “guidance” on how to best hold religious gatherings, while reducing the spread of COVID-19. The guidance continued to suggest churches hold online services or “drive-in” services, or other outdoor gatherings, rather than traditional indoor worship services.
In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, Pritzker and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul continued to assert the governor had the power to shut down churches in the name of public health, should he deem necessary. But in this case, Pritzker and Raoul argued the new IDPH guidance remedied the churches’ central contention.
The release of the governor’s new guidance prompted the legal teams for the churches to declare victory. However, they still asserted the Supreme Court should rule on the matter, and strike down the governor’s orders.
The Supreme Court, however, agreed that Pritzker’s move to replace the orders with health guidance undid the churches’ claims, and denied the churches’ request for an emergency order against Pritzker.
The high court then followed that with its order upholding California’s church service restrictions.
The Beloved Church’s June 5 filing carries no mention of those Supreme Court actions.
Instead, the filing asserted Pritzker’s decision to ease his restrictions ends, for now, the controversy over his prior actions. They said this means the appeals panel can’t review the decisions of the lower court federal judges.
They asked the appeals court to also vacate the district court rulings as moot, as well.
“… The state law issues addressed by the district court are being vigorously litigated in the Illinois state courts – in widely-reported challenges presented by individuals and small businesses – and thus the district court’s rulings undoubtedly have ‘legal consequences’ beyond the parties to this suit,” the Beloved Church wrote.
“Finally, these issues may well present themselves anew, as some experts predict a second wave of coronavirus in the Fall or Winter of this year, which may prompt a new round of mandates from Defendant Pritzker. He ought not be allowed to preserve for the future the benefits of this contested district court decision by mooting the controversy before appellate review.”
The Beloved Church and Cassell are represented in the action by attorneys Peter Breen, Thomas Brechja and Martin Whittaker, of the Thomas More Society, of Chicago.