Amid the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, Christians Gabriel Rench, Sean Bohnet, and Rachel Bohnet found themselves in hot water as a result of worshipping outdoors while not wearing masks, nor social distancing. The three were arrested at the spot of the worship service on September 2020 for violating Moscow, Idaho’s COVID-19 response policy. The group sued the city in U.S. district court in March 2021, and after an arduous two and a half years in litigation, Rench and the Bohnets prevailed. The city settled with the group on July 14 for $300,000 due to wrongful arrest of the three in September 2020.
Section 1-11-07 of the Moscow City Code (“the Ordinance”) exempts any expressive and associative activity that is protected by the United States and Idaho Constitutions, including speech, press, assembly, and/or religious activity, from public health emergency orders promulgated by the city. In July 2020, in order to stem a rise in COVID-19 cases, Moscow’s mayor issued Amended Public Health Emergency Order 20-03, requiring all individuals in Moscow to wear a face covering when in public spaces where 6-foot social distancing is not possible. The order also mandated that when possible, individuals should maintain 6-foot social distancing when in public spaces.
Rench and the Bohnets were arrested while participating in Christ Church’s outdoor Psalm sing, which doubled as a religious protest outside Moscow’s City Hall to object to the mask mandate in the mayor’s emergency order. Christ Church Pastor Doug Wilson had requested all attendees forgo wearing masks. Rench and the Bohnets, when arrested, were not wearing masks, nor were the two socially distant.
Law enforcement authorities had been briefed on the planned Psalm sing leading up to the event. When presenting arguments for probable cause and the arrest warrants, authorities gave the local magistrate judge granting arrest warrants affidavits that only referenced the emergency order but omitted the overarching Ordinance. As a result, the magistrate determined probable cause to arrest Rench and the Bohnets for violating the order mandating masks and social distancing, despite the fact that they were engaging in religious activity exempted by the Ordinance from general emergency health orders.
In response to their arrest, the plaintiffs filed suit in the U.S. District Court against the city of Moscow, seeking a jury trial to evaluate the merits of their arguments. Their main argument against the city was that the emergency order violated First Amendment protection for free speech and expressive association. Additionally, the plaintiffs argued that the city violated the Fourth Amendment for forcing them to identify themselves at the protest when there was no legitimate probable cause of them committing a crime.
In the District Court ruling by Judge Morrison England, the plaintiffs were vindicated as the city’s motion for summary judgment (for the Court to issue a judgment for the city and against the plaintiffs without a full trial) was denied. The Judge reminded the parties that for summary judgment to be granted, the city must show that there is no constitutional violation in any event. The crux of the city’s argument rests on the premise that the overarching Ordinance and the emergency order were ambiguous as to whether they addressed the Plaintiffs’ conduct. Judge England ruled that the city’s critical presupposition was faulty, considering the text of the Ordinance clearly excludes from emergency health orders expressive activity, which includes religious activity. Thus, he held that the plaintiffs should never have been arrested as their refusal to wear masks and socially distance falls under Section 1-11-07’s exception to any emergency health orders issued by the city’s government.
The judge also criticized the city authorities for not referencing the Ordinance when petitioning the magistrate judge for the probable cause finding. By extension, he contended that the magistrate’s probable cause was faulty as the information was incomplete.
However, the ruling also pushed back on some of the plaintiff’s arguments. Most notably, since the emergency order had expired by the time that the plaintiffs filed suit in the District Court, their appeal for declaratory or injunctive relief was put in peril. Regardless, the ruling still favored the plaintiffs, with the conclusion being a denial of the city’s motion and that the two parties settle out of court.
Five months after Judge England’s ruling, the city and the plaintiffs concluded their dispute. Moscow agreed to pay Rench and the Bohnets a collective $300,000 in exchange for all liability against the involved City officials to be dropped. The plaintiffs held fast to their religious convictions, and after a grueling two-and-a-half year legal battle, they finally have been compensated for their wrongful arrests.
Comment by David on July 24, 2023 at 7:01 am
People refusing to do a simple thing such as wearing a mask during a health emergency to protect the public and perhaps themselves is disgusting. I suppose it is part of the American “No one is going to tell me what to do” attitude. Even the scriptures have health regulations.
Comment by Different Steve on July 24, 2023 at 11:19 am
Masks don’t work against Covid. Fauci proclaimed that initially. Then he said we should wear them. Then he said he lied the first time trying to conserve the supply of masks for medical professionals So right off the bat we learned Fauci felt that lying to the populace to get a desired result. Then they wanted you to wear two, three or more. Meanwhile people are rioting with their identity concealed by the masks, conveniently in the leadup to a presidential election, while our health officials decide in that case that the right to protest outweighed the health implications. By that point it was obvious that the proclamations from our betters were not being made in good faith. Also meanwhile little children are developing speech pathologies during their formative years because they cannot see other people’s faces while talking, a critical part of learning how to talk. Don’t forget how they also lied about the vaccines preventing the spread of the disease. when the grossly inadequate clinical trials didn’t even test for that. Then there were the people who were demonized and thrown off social media for providing information about the possibility of a lab leak, which we now know from leaked emails the people in charge were discussing at the time as a real possibility, indicating that it could never be admitted even if true. The people that pushed back against this insanity and lies that went against centuries of public health practice aren’t disgusting, they deserve our thanks. Get a booster shot recently?
Comment by David on July 24, 2023 at 3:15 pm
Covid being a new disease was not fully understood at first. Changing advice based on more recent evident is not a sign of lying. As time went on, it became apparent that there was airborne transmission and that masks could in fact help prevent its spread. Neither masks nor vaccines are 100% effective, but help. I am fully vaccinated and had Covid definitely once and perhaps twice. At least the cases were very mild and cold-like despite my age. Unfortunately, anti-science political/religious groups focused on masks and other public health precautions leading to additional deaths. They have blood on their hands.
Comment by Different Steve on July 25, 2023 at 8:52 am
Did you miss the part where Fauci admitted lying about masks? It was not a matter of the science changing, he just lied and admittedly so. As for actual blood on the hands, how about Andrew Cuomo, who established an actual policy of placing covid infected individuals in nursing homes, resulting in thousands of deaths? How about the “best practice” of remesdivir and ventilators, which was basically a death sentence, and the doctors at the time knew it was? Best health management has always been, vulnerable people should protect themselves, those that aren’t in those groups, should get on with their lives. A possible exception might be if you have something on the level of the black plague, which this certainly is not. Speaking further on the subject of blood on hands, you have blood on your hands every time you participate in the practice of traveling in the motor vehicle at highway speeds.
Comment by Different Steve on July 25, 2023 at 9:09 am
Fully vaccinated: yeah, I’m “fully vaccinated” too, having had three shots. Obviously, these occurred far enough in the past that any effectiveness, if there were any, is long gone. Since then, they came out with the “bivalent” vaccine and possibly others that they wanted us to take: I didn’t and doubt you did either, based on your evasive language.
Comment by David on July 25, 2023 at 1:22 pm
If you recall, there was a shortage of medical equipment to deal with Covid when it first appeared. This included masks. To help preserve the supply for medical workers, Fauci initially suggested that people not buy masks. This was a form of triage.
Comment by Different Steve on July 26, 2023 at 7:33 am
By definition, Fauci did knowingly mislead the public. Instead of telling us, honestly, that we didn’t have enough initial PPE to protect both medical workers and the masses and that those not in healthcare settings should only use the sort of homemade cloth face masks that successfully protected many of us as the pandemic went on, Fauci simply lied to us, assuming that his overnight 180 wouldn’t erode public trust in his credibility. Fauci is lying about his lies about masks, and one only needs to read his own words to believe it.
Comment by Different Steve on July 26, 2023 at 7:40 am
Remember “two weeks to flatten the curve”? That reminds me of the joke about the big three lies, one of which was “the check’s in the mail”. Years later, it seemed as though we might never get the teachers to cooperate with resuming in person schooling.
Comment by Different Steve on July 26, 2023 at 7:50 am
Incidentally, the masks those law enforcement personnel were wearing in the photo look about as good as a lot of the lousy free masks stores would provide at their entrance, ie, not good at all.