Thread by @JasonRileyWDRB

Attorney for On Fire Christian Church tells U.S. District Judge Justin Walker of Louisville that they reached out to @louisvillemayor before and after lawsuit filed over not allowing drive-in services & received no response.
Hearing has started
Background:
wdrb.com/news/judge-gra…

Attorney says city is "singling out the church and church gatherings for enforcement." He said the pastor followed CDC social distancing guidelines on Easter.
The congregation met in a "safe" manner

Judge Walker asks about a picture of a collection basket being handed around. "It's not clear to me that there's not another way to collect money that wouldn't involve passing a basket where people are within six feet of each other," the judge says.

Attorney for church says that was an older picture several weeks ago "and a lot has changed" since then. There was no basket passed around on Sunday.

"As the situation has evolved, the church has learned just as the rest of us have learned."

Judge says under CDC guidelines, churches "should" postpone gatherings. Is On Fire complying, he asks.

Attorney said the church is complying by ensuring smaller groupings of people.

Judge asks why not put vehicle windows all the way up?

Service is over loud speaker, attorney responds.

What if police see people not social distancing? Could the mayor then ban drive-in service, judge asks.

Mayor can't "target" religion, attorney says.

Attorney says police/mayor can punish a parishioner for not properly social distancing, but can't "infringe on my client's right" to hold a religious gathering.

Judge agrees with this.

The church is not asking for the Constitution to be a "suicide pact," attorney says. Government is taking approach of "a meat cleaver when a scalpel will do."

What if the city says that there is no official "ban," judge asks.

"If they communicate to the police officers there is no ban" and no enforcement of a ban, that might be different, attorney for church says.

John Carroll, an attorney w/ the city, tells the judge the mayor has the right to take measures that could save lives. Carroll said the church has repeatedly violated @GovAndyBeshear's order on social distancing.
Says the pictures entered as evidence are from C-J and are recent

State and mayor have right to "take reasonable measures" and "enforce those measures if need be" during a pandemic, Carroll says. "The mayor in this situation ... was being very compassionate."
"To say he is out threatening folks left and right is not correct."

Mayor "does have certain powers" given to him and has a "duty to enforce the law," Carroll says. But in this instance, no action was taken. No one has been arrested for violation.
The judge should look at the governor's March 19 order. Fischer did not give an "order," city says.

Judge said "it has been represented" that city twice tried to reach him. Carroll says they tried to reach other attorneys, not judge. Judge says @louisvillemayor said city tried to reach court twice. "Was he correct?" judge asks.
Don't think so, city says.

"I appreciate the clarification very much," judge says.

Does city believe drive-in church services are illegal under @GovAndyBeshear's March 19 order?

In-person church services, certainly, are illegal, attorney says.

Drive-in services are against "the spirit of the order," he adds, saying it's tough to give a blanket statement

Judge notes that the city didn't answer his question. "Do you think they are illegal" he asks again.

Attorney for city says "it's a tough question" and really doesn't answer again.

"I''m not trying to be difficult," judge says, but he wants an answer to this question.
Judge says case could hinge on this question.

"I'm still not clear. if I was a citizen and called your office" about drive-in services, what would you say? Are they legal?

Attorney says he wouldn't know what to tell citizen. "Interpret it as we have."

Judge seems shocked.

Now attorney trying to say judge is getting into something that "is not before this court."

This should go well.

Judge asks if it's not "frightening" that city would right now tell people your actions "may or may not be illegal."

Your statement seems to be "maybe that's illegal, maybe that's not illegal," judge says.

City finally says it wouldn't follow CDC guidelines.

City decides that it is NOT illegal. Judge then asks why mayor said he wouldn't allow it "in any capacity"

"Your honor, the mayor is not a lawyer," city responds.

This guy led them right into this trap

"You think it's appropriate for the mayor to say something is not allowed when it is allowed?" judge says, rebuking the attorneys.

Not for them to say what mayor should and shouldn't be saying, city says

Ok, now looks like the city may be leaning towards saying it is illegal because it could bring a criminal charge, such as disorderly conduct.

Drive-thru service is NOT illegal if the church follows social distancing rules, attorney for city says. "We said it earlier and we stand by it," he tells judge.

So did the church violate social distancing guidelines during the Easter service? Attorney for city is not sure.

If social distancing is not observed during drive-in church service, "we believe we can take action," attorney for city says.

Judge says @louisvillemayor clearly wasn't allowing any church drive-thru services. Since police work for the mayor, this was the city's policy, judge argues.

City says mayor didn't intend everything he said in a TV broadcast to be an "order" or policy. And no action has been taken against the church.

Would they have faced consequences, judge asks? "I can't predict the future" but before judge's order, no action was taken.

"Is the case now moot?" judge asks. Both sides are going to file briefs.

"I'm sure we can work this out," attorney for church says as mediation is discussed.