ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Federal Courts strike down Gov. Wolf's Covid Restrictions as unconstitutional...

Well, looking at just the sports aspect, that should remove the arbitrary limits on attendance (25 people indoors, 250 outdoors including players/ coaches/ refs etc). You can certainly have more than that and still mask and socially distance.

I don’t expect Penn St to change but this does open up the possibility for parents to be able to watch their kids in PIAA events.
 
Not a surprising result, nor will the result on appeal be surprising.
 
Open things up for whatever is still closed... I guess for you folks

LInks
FYI, the PA State Legislature is supposed to vote on a House Bill this week that effectively would permit non-school indoor sports to be held at 50% of a venue's capacity. I'm hopeful that this bill will pass with veto-proof majorities, as did the school sports bill a few weeks ago.
 
LULZ

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to get involved in the debate over Pennsylvania’s business closure orders.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in a similar case seeking to block California’s restrictions on religious gatherings, wrote earlier this year that government officials should be granted wide latitude to act in areas “fraught with medical and scientific uncertainties” and should not be “subject to second guessing by the unelected federal judiciary.”

IANAL, but it seems to me that the opinion of this one judge settles nothing. Maybe he will enjoy his 15 minutes of fame. IDK.
 
LULZ

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to get involved in the debate over Pennsylvania’s business closure orders.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in a similar case seeking to block California’s restrictions on religious gatherings, wrote earlier this year that government officials should be granted wide latitude to act in areas “fraught with medical and scientific uncertainties” and should not be “subject to second guessing by the unelected federal judiciary.”

IANAL, but it seems to me that the opinion of this one judge settles nothing. Maybe he will enjoy his 15 minutes of fame. IDK.

Or maybe he is right.
 
Can you let me know which federal court did this? As an uncle of a travel hockey player who was going to be limited in attending his games this season, I'm happy to hear that.
Me too brother. Tired of sitting in the parking lot watching grainy live streams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
FYI, the PA State Legislature is supposed to vote on a House Bill this week that effectively would permit non-school indoor sports to be held at 50% of a venue's capacity. I'm hopeful that this bill will pass with veto-proof majorities, as did the school sports bill a few weeks ago.
LULZ

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to get involved in the debate over Pennsylvania’s business closure orders.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in a similar case seeking to block California’s restrictions on religious gatherings, wrote earlier this year that government officials should be granted wide latitude to act in areas “fraught with medical and scientific uncertainties” and should not be “subject to second guessing by the unelected federal judiciary.”

IANAL, but it seems to me that the opinion of this one judge settles nothing. Maybe he will enjoy his 15 minutes of fame. IDK.
Well, this decision becomes the law in Pennsylvania unless and until there is an appeal to the Third Circuit and unless and until that appeal results in the decision being overturned (the decision could also effectively be held in abeyance if a stay pending appeal is applied for and granted). Therefore, I don’t follow your point. If there is no appeal, the decision stands. If there is an appeal to the Third Circuit, they may well affirm, again making the decision the law in Pennsylvania. What did or did not happen in other Federal cases is wholly irrelevant to this one. As you said, you are not a lawyer...
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustinTyme
FYI, the PA State Legislature is supposed to vote on a House Bill this week that effectively would permit non-school indoor sports to be held at 50% of a venue's capacity. I'm hopeful that this bill will pass with veto-proof majorities, as did the school sports bill a few weeks ago.
Probably won’t be voted on this week. Governor has 10 days to decide what to do. I would assume he will take all 10 days and then veto it. Then goes back to legislature and senate, where 2/3 vote is needed by both to over ride. So, could take till end of month until things are sorted out.
 
It seems to me that al state and federal emergency powers are limited to 30 days and are not renewable. The emergency powers have the weight of law so that emergencies can be attended to immediately. The 30 day period allows time for the legislature to pass a law if the emergency can not be fixed quickly. Going past 30 days was also overturned in Wisconsin I believe.

I am not a lawyer but this is what I remember from “civics class.

NJ just got sued by movie theaters and the state settled opening up theaters at 40% probably avoiding throwing out all restrictions in the state as unconstitutional. NJ has extended the emergency 30 day period 6 times and will likely do so at least 2 more times until the election passes. If the believe the problem is so bad they should have done it the right way and passed a law.

Politics or science? If it was just science they would have passed a law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cment
ADVERTISEMENT