When Governor Mike Parson issued an executive order for Missourians to limit their activities due to the coronavirus pandemic, one of his Republican challengers for the governor's seat cried foul. Saundra McDowell said the order infringed on religious liberties. KSMU asked a political science professor to delve into those issues further.
McDowell released a statement that called Governor Parson’s stay-at-home order unconstitutional. She said the order that closes churches violates the First Amendment rights to peacefully assemble and the free exercise of religion.
Dr. Kevin Pybas, associate professor of political science at Missouri State University, told KSMU that the question isn’t whether the stay-at-home order affects these rights – it’s whether public health needs outweigh them.
"To say that it's interfering with individual liberties doesn't make it unconstitutional," he said. "Government regularly interferes with our liberty; we're not free to live our lives however we want."
Dr. Pybas said if this issue were brought to court, the government would need to show it has what’s called a "compelling interest," or a solid reason, for the stay-at-home order. In the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, the state could say protecting public health is a compelling interest and keeping Missourians away from large gatherings like church services is the only way to prevent more deaths.
In her statement, Saunders said the CDC overestimated the number of Americans who could lose their lives to the coronavirus. She argued that a stay-at-home order is an overreaction.
Pybas said even if it is an overreaction, courts are likely to see emergency measures as necessary during an emergency. He said it’s hard to see courts siding against the government in this case.
"Historically, there's always been great deference to elected officials in a time of crisis."
He also said the constitutional question is harder to answer because there haven’t been many civil rights cases that involved a pandemic quite like COVID-19.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Justice Department issued a "statement of interest" in a Mississippi case involving a church that wanted to continue drive-in services. The statement walked a fine line: it said while states were within their rights to issue stay-at-home orders, they should be very cautious not to target or discriminate against religious groups.
