A right to get sick?

A protester on Saturday circled the governor’s mansion in Jackson, Miss., in a white Chevy Tahoe with the slogan “I prefer dangerous liberty to peaceful slavery” painted on the back windshield. Earlier in the week, a blond woman sat on the steps of the Kansas Capitol in Topeka with a sign that read, “My business, my choice.” And the week before, a man in Olympia, Wash., wearing a Seattle Seahawks jersey held up a sign that declared, “Give me liberty, or give me death.”

In their own ways, all three protesters shared a willingness to pay the possible price of illness in exchange for an end to the coronavirus-related shutdowns. At least a dozen states in recent weeks have seen demonstrations against public health restrictions as frustration grows over the economic downturn, rising unemployment, and restrictions on individual liberties, like the rights to worship, speak, assemble and protest, travel, and work.

An April 18 letter from Anthony Biller, an attorney for the group ReopenNC, urged North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, to end the shutdown and called “quarantine orders” unconstitutional. Cooper announced on Thursday that the state’s stay-at-home order, set to expire on Wednesday, would extend through May 8, followed by a cautious three-phase reopening to prevent a resurgence of COVID-19.

Many states have faced lawsuits over such measures, which have included school cancellations, and gathering bans. A bridal shop in Ohio challenged the state order that declared it a nonessential business and forced it to close. In Wisconsin, where thousands of protesters turned out in Madison, the state capital, on Friday, the Republican-controlled legislature is suing Democratic Gov. Tony Evers after he extended the state’s stay-at-home order, shuttering most businesses through May 26. Lawmakers want the state Supreme Court to stop the enforcement of the order, contending “an unelected, unconfirmed Cabinet secretary has laid claim to a suite of czar-like powers—unlimited in scope and indefinite in duration—over the people of Wisconsin.”

On Monday, The Washington Times reported that U.S. Attorney General William Barr sent a memo to federal prosecutors nationwide saying the U.S. Department of Justice may have to file lawsuits to address state and local ordinances that “cross the line.”

Some dissenters simply have said they won’t comply. Snohomish County, Wash., Sheriff Adam Fortney, echoing some other sheriffs in his state and across the country, said he won’t enforce Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee’s directive banning things like church gatherings because the mandate “intrudes on our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Mike Adams, a professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington, wrote that he would hold religious services in his home despite the gathering bans. He dared local officials to arrest him so that he could mount a legal challenge to state and local stay-at-home orders. Liberty Counsel, a religious liberty law firm, is promoting a “ReOpen Church Sunday” this week.

Michelle Kirtley, a fellow with the Center for Public Justice, a Christian policy organization, said an exclusive focus on individual rights can come at the expense of human flourishing.

“Scripture puts forth a vision of what, even this side of the fall, a really flourishing community looks like,” she said. “It always involves responsibility to one another.”

Kirtley, a cell biologist who worked as a health and science policy adviser for members of Congress for six years, noted one protester held a sign that read, “I have a right to get sick if I want to.” She said that type of attitude ignores humans’ interconnectedness.

“The fact that I should, as a Christian, be willing to sacrifice some of my good and my liberties for the sake of someone else should be a larger part of the conversation,” said Kirtley, adding that other entities like families, businesses, schools, and non-profit groups should play a role in mediating between individuals and government. For example, business leaders in Wisconsin last week offered their own plan to restart the economy three weeks before the governor did.

Kirtley’s take harks back to 19th-century Dutch theologian and Prime Minister Abraham Kuyper, whose concept of “sphere sovereignty” balanced the rights of the individual with the integrity of other entities in society. Each has its own place in creation as they fulfill different purposes, according to Kuyper, with the government having the overarching role of coordinating their work together for the health of society.

Those ideas may be non-starters with protesters carrying signs that say, “I have a right to play golf.” But they also may encourage a conversation about how to love one another well while protecting liberty.

Broken record

By now, it’s beginning to sound familiar: Governmental officials ban drive-in worship services as part of stay-at-home orders during the coronavirus pandemic, churches mount a challenge, and the officials revise the order. The latest version of the story just played out in New York’s Chemung County.

County Executive Christopher Moss announced on Facebook Live just before Easter that churches couldn’t hold drive-in services. First Liberty’s Keisha Russell sent a letter to Moss on Wednesday asking him to rescind the prohibition. A day later, he did.

Government officials are increasingly recognizing that drive-in worship, with appropriate social distancing protocols, does not put public health at risk. Lawsuits have pushed the issue forward in Kentucky, Mississippi, California, and Tennessee, where Chattanooga Mayor Andy Berke explained in a tweet last week that pastors assured him they could conduct drive-in services safely by employing social distancing guidelines. Following a challenge, officials in Wake County, N.C., changed their policy on Friday to allow churches to offer pre-packaged communion elements and collect tithes and other monetary donations in boxes at drive-in services. —S.W.

Image management

A new report from a campus free speech organization details the extent to which universities screen out negative comments on their social media pages.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which works to defend the rights of students and faculty members at colleges and universities, sent public record requests to 224 public universities across the country. It found that one-third of the schools used Facebook and Twitter content filters not only to block profane or obscene comments but also to hide terms closely associated with particular criticisms. For example, the report found that students at schools like Oklahoma State University, where the names of political candidates are automatically blacklisted, would encounter difficulty if they mentioned candidates’ names in response to the schools’ posts about getting out the vote.

“State universities are preemptively censoring large swaths of protected speech and altering the public discourse with just a few clicks of the mouse—and Facebook gives them all the tools they need to do it,” said FIRE Executive Director Robert Shibley. —S.W.

In-person worship sanctioned

Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, settled a lawsuit brought by two Baptist churches in the state that wanted to hold in-person worship services during the coronavirus pandemic. After a U.S. District Court judge granted them a temporary order restraining enforcement of the governor’s ban of such gatherings last week, the parties reached a settlement allowing services to proceed for the next 14 days if the churches followed safety protocols. In the meantime, Kelly can amend the mass gathering ban’s application to churches. —S.W.