California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

[Zorro!]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

 

[Dick Foster]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

View attachment 427872​

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

Nor are the face maks or any of the other pandemic measures and bullshit.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

In the empire of Newsom no evidence is needed to shut down the people.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

View attachment 427872​

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

Just like Global Warming its about feelings not facts.

 

[FA_Q2]

Wow, score one for actual freedom.

Looks like it is not going to have any effect though. Clearly this has nothing to do with science, waivers are granted to those institutions that have the correct political clout, pure corruption IOW. What needs to actually happen is refusal to comply. That is the only answer here. People need to stop being sheep and refuse to comply with outrageous demands by political figures that do not have the power to make those demands in the first place.

 

[Zorro!]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

View attachment 427872​

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

Just like Global Warming its about feelings not facts.

It's about control.

 

[Zorro!]

Wow, score one for actual freedom.

Looks like it is not going to have any effect though. Clearly this has nothing to do with science, waivers are granted to those institutions that have the correct political clout, pure corruption IOW. What needs to actually happen is refusal to comply. That is the only answer here. People need to stop being sheep and refuse to comply with outrageous demands by political figures that do not have the power to make those demands in the first place.

CA Sheriffs, County Officials and Businesses are in open rebellion. It started with the Leftwing Looter Waivers but then when all these these officials were caught in Restaurants, Health Clubs, Personal Care Parlors, while the rest could not see their dying parents or attend weddings/funerals, enough was enough.

There are Counties in CA where officials have said that they will use CARES funding to pay any fines imposed on businesses by the State COVID Hypocrites.

THE QUESTION IS WHETHER CHRISTIANS WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS RULE, OR JUST MUSLIMS: Supreme Court Puts Agents on Financial Hook for Religious Freedom Violations. If it’s extended to Christians — and sadly I’m only sort of joking about the uncertainty of that, alas — then Gavin Newsom could be at considerable risk.

The Supreme Court said Thursday that federal agents can be forced to pay out of their own pocket for religious liberty violations.

The decision allows three Muslim men to seek monetary damages from FBI agents who placed them on the no-fly list as retaliation for turning down requests to become informants. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

"This is a good decision that makes it easier to hold the government accountable when it violates Americans' religious liberties," said Lori Windham of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which filed a brief supporting the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs in Thursday's case, Muhammad Tanvir, Jameel Algibhah, and Naveed Shinwari, are Muslim citizens or green card holders who say FBI special agents attempted to recruit them as informants in the New York City area and abroad. For example, Algibhah alleges that agents asked him to attend particular mosques, behave like an extremist, and engage on online Islamic forums.

All three men refused, citing their Muslim faith. They said informing amounts to bearing false witness, worshiping under false pretenses, and betraying the trust of fellow Muslims. A short time later, the agents added them to the no-fly list.

"The agents relied upon what they assumed would be the irresistible coercion of the no fly list—causing each plaintiff to be placed on the list and then either threatening to keep him on the list for refusing to accede to the FBI's demands, or offering the incentive of being removed from the list in exchange for services as an FBI informant," the plaintiffs' lawyers wrote in a brief to the justices.​

In turn, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Though their names have since been removed from the list, they are still seeking monetary compensation directly from the agents responsible. The men want to recoup the cost of wasted plane tickets or job opportunities lost due to their inability to travel. Tanvir couldn't obtain a full refund from his airline after he had to cancel a trip to visit his ailing mother in Pakistan.

 

[marvin martian]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

View attachment 427872​

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

Just like Global Warming its about feelings not facts.

The Democrats are the anti-science party.

 

[Gdjjr]

A short time later, the agents added them to the no-fly list.

When the man comes around- is the first thing that came to mind- yet, we who hold authority figures in contempt are told to rely on authority figures in a court of authority- WTF is up with that?

 

[Zorro!]

A short time later, the agents added them to the no-fly list.

When the man comes around- is the first thing that came to mind- yet, we who hold authority figures in contempt are told to rely on authority figures in a court of authority- WTF is up with that?

We hold authority figures who misuse their authority, in contempt.

Here is why:

We have no Lords or Ladies in the US. Titles of Nobility are forbidden by our Constitution. All power is derived from We The People. The authority they are misusing is on grant from us.

We do not grant them authority so that they can misuse it against us. Good for the Court for putting these bastards on notice that when they misuse OUR authority, the bastards will pay the damages, out of their own pocket!

 

[Manonthestreet]

Californians Are Fed Up With Newsom’s Draconian Shutdowns | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
As C. S. Lewis once wrote, “A tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive…. Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Gavin Newsom had a plan. Draconian lockdowns that he would use to bilk 3 million dollars from the tax payers.

Gov. Newsom's Companies Got $3 Million In Relief Loans

The governor put his business holdings into a blind trust before he took office and so would not have participated in the decision. But the disclosure comes as he already is battling criticism that he is elitist despite his protests that he is a proud small businessman and entrepreneur

www.kpbs.org

.

Because it was all a fraud to begin with he need not comply.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

View attachment 427872​

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

Denier!

COVID DENIER!!

 

[FA_Q2]

Wow, score one for actual freedom.

Looks like it is not going to have any effect though. Clearly this has nothing to do with science, waivers are granted to those institutions that have the correct political clout, pure corruption IOW. What needs to actually happen is refusal to comply. That is the only answer here. People need to stop being sheep and refuse to comply with outrageous demands by political figures that do not have the power to make those demands in the first place.

CA Sheriffs, County Officials and Businesses are in open rebellion. It started with the Leftwing Looter Waivers but then when all these these officials were caught in Restaurants, Health Clubs, Personal Care Parlors, while the rest could not see their dying parents or attend weddings/funerals, enough was enough.

There are Counties in CA where officials have said that they will use CARES funding to pay any fines imposed on businesses by the State COVID Hypocrites.

THE QUESTION IS WHETHER CHRISTIANS WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS RULE, OR JUST MUSLIMS: Supreme Court Puts Agents on Financial Hook for Religious Freedom Violations. If it’s extended to Christians — and sadly I’m only sort of joking about the uncertainty of that, alas — then Gavin Newsom could be at considerable risk.

The Supreme Court said Thursday that federal agents can be forced to pay out of their own pocket for religious liberty violations.

The decision allows three Muslim men to seek monetary damages from FBI agents who placed them on the no-fly list as retaliation for turning down requests to become informants. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

"This is a good decision that makes it easier to hold the government accountable when it violates Americans' religious liberties," said Lori Windham of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which filed a brief supporting the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs in Thursday's case, Muhammad Tanvir, Jameel Algibhah, and Naveed Shinwari, are Muslim citizens or green card holders who say FBI special agents attempted to recruit them as informants in the New York City area and abroad. For example, Algibhah alleges that agents asked him to attend particular mosques, behave like an extremist, and engage on online Islamic forums.

All three men refused, citing their Muslim faith. They said informing amounts to bearing false witness, worshiping under false pretenses, and betraying the trust of fellow Muslims. A short time later, the agents added them to the no-fly list.

"The agents relied upon what they assumed would be the irresistible coercion of the no fly list—causing each plaintiff to be placed on the list and then either threatening to keep him on the list for refusing to accede to the FBI's demands, or offering the incentive of being removed from the list in exchange for services as an FBI informant," the plaintiffs' lawyers wrote in a brief to the justices.​

In turn, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Though their names have since been removed from the list, they are still seeking monetary compensation directly from the agents responsible. The men want to recoup the cost of wasted plane tickets or job opportunities lost due to their inability to travel. Tanvir couldn't obtain a full refund from his airline after he had to cancel a trip to visit his ailing mother in Pakistan.

One has to wonder why abuse of power like that is not a criminal offence.

Being held financially responsible for their losses is a step in the right direction but they should see the inside of a cell for that kind of abuse. The government should not be coercing anyone into action, that is not the proper role and use of the power given to the government.

 

[cnm]

Judge Tells Los Angeles They Actually Need Evidence to Ban ...

(2/4)"We are pleased today for the order from Judge James C. Chalfant. An order to show cause means that Los Angeles County, which has banned outdoor dining at restaurants, must finally step forward and show evidence linking outdoor dining to the ongoing rise in coronavirus cases — @CalRestaurants (@CalRestaurants) December 2, 2020


California judge sides with church by allowing indoor ...

Aug 14, 2020
Superior Court Judge James Chalfant denied the county's request for a temporary restraining order against Grace Community Church after the church began holding indoor services July 26 in ...

 

[cnm]

Denier!

COVID DENIER!!

Seems like.

 

[BertramN]

.
An article written by Annie Reneau contains excerpts from a Face Book post.‭ ‬The piece on Face Book was written by a nurse,‭ ‬hoping to help laypersons understand some of the COVID-19‭ ‬restrictions,‭ ‬which,‭ ‬at face value,‭ ‬seem to baffle and/or anger many average citizens.‭

The nurse first explains why,‭ ‬when an irritated customer confronts an employee attempting to enforce a business‭’ ‬or state COVID-19‭ ‬policy or restriction,‭ ‬that customer becomes much more angry when the employee cannot justify,‭ ‬to that customer,‭ ‬the reason for the policy or restriction.‭ ‬The employee’s inability to offer an acceptable response to the customer is based on the fact that,‭ ‬most people,‭ ‬not employed in or studying the fields of virology,‭ ‬epidemiology or public health,‭ ‬haven’t the necessary knowledge to fully explain to the irritated customer the scientific and/or medical principles involved in the decisions to implement the policy or restriction.

Fortunately,‭ ‬yes,‭ ‬fortunately,‭ ‬the RWNJs‭’ ‬confidence in their own knowledge being vastly superior to that of experts in...‭ ‬everything,‭ which, ‬forces them to attend super-spreader events,‭ ‬refuse to wear masks,‭ ‬and defy every method put forth to slow the spread of COVID-19.‭ ‬Happily,‭ ‬yes,‭ ‬happily,‭ ‬the RWNJs in red states are suffering the highest death rates across the country. (South Dakota leading the pack, as 1 person per 800 in that state have died from the novel coronavirus as of 12/08/20.)

That right-wing denial of facts they decide are wrong,‭ ‬is killing them off in droves.‭ ‬Luckily,‭ ‬yes,‭ ‬luckily,‭ ‬the RWNJs deny the thousands-of-deaths of their conservative Christian brethren are due to COVID-19.‭ (‬Most RWNJs deny the disease exists,‭ ‬even with their dying breath.‭)

So,‭ ‬Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C.‭ ‬Chalfant,‭ ‬please rule against government officials‭’ ‬attempts to protect the RWNJs from their own stubborn stupidity.‭ ‬Rule they can organize,‭ ‬produce,‭ ‬and fill indoor venues to SRO crowds,‭ ‬ban face masks and social distancing,‭ ‬and really set record death tolls among the RWNJs who demand their constitutional rights to contract COVID,‭ ‬and let it do its worse to those RWNJS.‭ ‬They’ve asked for it.

https://www.upworthy.com/nurse-valid-reasons-for-some-pandemic-restrictions-‭


.

 

[Zorro!]

.
An article written by Annie Reneau contains excerpts from a Face Book post.‭ ‬The piece on Face Book was written by a nurse,‭ ‬hoping to help laypersons understand some of the COVID-19‭ ‬restrictions,‭ ‬which,‭ ‬at face value,‭ ‬seem to baffle and/or anger many average citizens.‭

The nurse first explains why,‭ ‬when an irritated customer confronts an employee attempting to enforce a business‭’ ‬or state COVID-19‭ ‬policy or restriction,‭ ‬that customer becomes much more angry when the employee cannot justify,‭ ‬to that customer,‭ ‬the reason for the policy or restriction.‭ ‬The employee’s inability to offer an acceptable response to the customer is based on the fact that,‭ ‬most people,‭ ‬not employed in or studying the fields of virology,‭ ‬epidemiology or public health,‭ ‬haven’t the necessary knowledge to fully explain to the irritated customer the scientific and/or medical principles involved in the decisions to implement the policy or restriction.

Fortunately,‭ ‬yes,‭ ‬fortunately,‭ ‬the RWNJs‭’ ‬confidence in their own knowledge being vastly superior to that of experts in...‭ ‬everything,‭ which, ‬forces them to attend super-spreader events,‭ ‬refuse to wear masks,‭ ‬and defy every method put forth to slow the spread of COVID-19.‭

3 paragraphs in and you have explained nothing.

...‬Happily,‭ ‬yes,‭ ‬happily,‭ ‬the RWNJs in red states are suffering the highest death rates across the country. (South Dakota leading the pack, as 1 person per 800 in that state have died from the novel coronavirus as of 12/08/20.)...

Fake News. At a death of 0.15% they trail CT which has a higher rate, MA at 0.16% has a higher rate, as does NY at 0.18% dead, as does NJ at 0.20% dead. 5th is not the "highest" and when the highest 4 are Blue states, Red states aren't suffering the highest death rates.

How can you be so uninformed and outraged at the same time? It's just not that hard to double check these things before you embarrass yourself.

United States COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer

United States Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.

www.worldometers.info

That 1st amendment really gets in the way of your hateful totalitarianism. Which is good, it's supposed to. Try doing something kind for someone today rather than wishing death on those who resist your attempts at petty tyranny.

The question on the table which you avoided, and CA could not answer, is why is Outdoor dining dangerous but Gov Newsome's tightly packed indoor dining with Lobbyists not?

 

[NoNukes]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

View attachment 427872​

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

Just like Global Warming its about feelings not facts.

Global warming is backed by science.

 

[NoNukes]

California Judge Says Los Angeles County’s Outdoor Dining Ban Isn’t ‘Grounded in Science, Evidence, or Logic.’

A decision from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant is yet another rebuke of officials trying to reimpose lockdowns on a skeptical public.

View attachment 427872​

A California judge has blocked Los Angeles County's ban on outdoor dining in a sharply worded opinion that cites both a lack of evidence for the policy's efficacy in controlling the pandemic and public health officials' failure to consider the costs of closing down on-site dining for some 30,000 restaurants.

The county's ban "is an abuse of the Health Department's emergency powers, and is not grounded in science, evidence, or logic," wrote Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant in a decision in a lawsuit brought by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) challenging the policy.

Individual restaurants have said they wouldn't comply with a ban on outdoor dining, and county sheriffs have said they won't enforce one. One café even labeled its diners "peaceful protestors" in a nod to an exemption in current restrictions for outdoor political expression. Several municipalities within Los Angeles County registered their dissent by vowing to create their own health departments.

Just like Global Warming its about feelings not facts.

The Democrats are the anti-science party.

An outright lie.