WH press secretary, Kayleigh SLAMS Democrat leaders over lockdown hypocrisy
Libby Emmons – https://thepostmillennial.com/
McEnany pointed out New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s unconstitutional edicts to close churches and limit houses of worship from operating in that state.
“Quite clearly,” she said, “these Democrats do not follow their own edicts. They act in a way that their own citizens are barred from acting. Governor Cuomo’s decision to impose restrictions on the size of religious gatherings was rebuked by the highest court in the land.
“But what was Cuomo’s response? Instead of showing deference to the Constitution, he attacked the legitimacy of the Court. Governor Cuomo said this ‘you have a different court and I think that was the statement that the court was making. We know who he appointed to the court, we know their ideology.’
“Well in fact the ideology of those on the Supreme Court who made the decision to support the First Amendment are in favor of freedom, the Constitution, that survives even during a pandemic.
“This statement from Governor Cuomo strikes at the heart of the issue: Democrats seek control. These images behind me make clear Democrats’ mindset: Rules for thee, and not for me.
“The President stands with you, your freedom, your ability to decide how to protect your help. We all know how to protect ourselves from Covid-19: wash your hands, socially distance, wear a mask.
“But as one federal court put it, there is no pandemic exception to the Constitution.”
McEnany was referring to the Supreme Court’s emergency ruling, issued late on Thanksgiving Eve, Nov. 25. The Supreme Court heard an emergency case from religious leaders from both the Catholic and Jewish communities in New York who had claimed that their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion were being unjustly infringed upon by Cuomo.
In a 5-4 decision, the Justices blocked the restrictions imposed by Cuomo of New York which restricted the number of people allowed to worship together. “Even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten,” they wrote.
Their reasoning for issuing the emergency order was on the basis of three criteria, stating that if a case were brought to full trial before the court, there was a “likelihood of success on the merits” of that case.
Second, they stated that the restrictions on religious worship caused “irreparable harm” to First Amendment rights. Third, they noted the “public interest” of the case, saying that “it has not been shown that granting the applications will harm the public.”