Here's another complaint (here's the first) challenging a state's business shut-down order as a taking. This time it is Colorado, and the complaint seeks an injunction and compensation.
Here are the highlights:
- "As a result of the [shutdown] Orders listed above that restrict the gathering of more than ten people at a time, the plaintiff's parish has ceased conducting weekly Mass, has ceased offering the Eucharist, and has ceased hearing confessions. The defendants' conduct has impaired the plaintiff's ability to freely exercise his religious faith, in violation of the Fifth Amendment."
- "The plaintiff is a cook at a local restaurant." The restaurant is now closed. "Because the defendants' Orders have limited the use of the plaintiff's place of work for the owner of the premises, such a limitation constitutes an exercise of eminent domain over those premises."
- "An increase of less than 1% in our death rate is not an eventuation that justifies the destruction of the Constitutional and the thriving Colorado economy."
- "Deaths from voluntary bad habits in Colorado amount to 1,265 deaths per month. The total death toll from the Wuhan flu after 1.5 months in Colorado is 47. This is scarcely a noticeable amount. This is not an emergency."
- "The defendants' stay-at-home orders are analogous to the interning of Japanese-Americans in WWII."
- "The plaintiff is a citizen, not a serf. The plaintiff has rights under the U.S. Constitution that cannot be voided because the defendants blow up an imaginary crisis out of panic and ignorance."
Do the takings claims have any better chance than in the other complaints?
Stay tuned.
Complaint for Injunctive Relief Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 65, Lawrence v. State of Colorado, No. 20-
