Column: Should COVID-19 Kill the First Amendment? – The Herald-Times

Posted: October 7, 2021 at 3:29 pm

Lesley Spatta| Guest columnist

The death rate of the smallpox pandemic in 1903 was 30%. The court in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts ruled in favor of the state of Massachusetts and allowed the local smallpox vaccine mandate to remain. The individuals choosing to forgo the vaccine would be assessed a $5 fine. The equivalent of $5 today is approximately $150. The cost today of not being vaccinated is your job and the entrance to higher education. The cumulative cost of either one of these is far more than $150.

The federal government has never mandated a vaccine nor has this government made Emergency Use Vaccines compulsory. Many journalists are using the Cambridge, Massachusetts, smallpox mandate to claim legal precedence of federal government vaccine mandates. There is no legal precedence for federal vaccine mandates, nor is there a precedence for job termination due to non vaccination.

There was an article on the front page of the Herald-Times recently that outlined the journey of an Ivy Tech nursing student applying for the religious exemption for the COVID-19 vaccine ("'I would give up everything,'" Sept. 15, 2021). Most of the article read like government propaganda for a federal vaccine mandate instead of an article in support of the students First Amendments right. I thought journalists were protected by the First Amendment. Are we in perilous times?

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act protects the free exercise of religion even in times of pandemics. Rep. Charles E. Schumer, a Democrat, from New York sponsored the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. The act prohibits any agency, department, or official of the United States or any state (from the government) from substantially burdening a persons exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.

The city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, assessed a $5 fine on the unvaccinated. The $5 fine would be considered the least restrictive means of furthering the governments compelling interest. A compelling interest by the government is one that is essential or necessary rather than a matter of choice or preference.

The Jacobson vs. Massachusetts decision was not a federal mandate. Again, the decision gave power to the state of Massachusetts. The fine assessed to Henning Jacobson was only $5. The burden on the unvaccinated was not substantial.

COVID-19 has killed many, but must it kill the First Amendment? Many lives have been lost to protect this freedom. If COVID-19 kills the First Amendment, our country will die with it.

Lesley Spatta is a U.S. history teacher andresident of Spencer, Indiana.

Here is the original post:
Column: Should COVID-19 Kill the First Amendment? - The Herald-Times

Related Posts