Attorney Statement on the “Reluctant” Denial of the Reargument for the Religious Exemption Stay in NY
December 18, 2019
On December 16th, we received notice that Judge Wiggins “reluctantly” denied our motion to reargue for a preliminary injunction, which would have allowed tens of thousands of healthy NY children to return to school while our trial challenging the constitutionality of NY’s religious exemption repeal law makes its way through the Courts.
We are disappointed and frustrated by this decision, but we are not surprised. We are currently evaluating all options, including appealing this decision, and will announce our next steps shortly.
In the decision, Judge Wiggins wrote that while he personally “may disagree with the (repeal) law,” Wiggins did not believe any law was “overlooked or misapprehended” when he denied our request for a preliminary injunction on October 9th. We strongly disagree.
In addition to case law cited in the denial motion, the Court overlooked and misapprehended both Article 1 Section 3 (religious liberty) and Article 11, Section 1 (right to school for ALL) of the NYS Constitution when initially denying the stay. We look forward to arguing this during the full trial in 2020. We believe we will prevail, and that the healthy children of the faithful will be back in school where they belong prior to the beginning of the 2020-21 school year.
We still believe there are judges in New York State willing to uphold the NYS Constitution and willing to stand up to the ruthless Albany Political Machine .
“In 20 years of practicing law, I have never experienced a judge writing that he ‘reluctantly’ denied a motion. If a judge is reluctant to deny a motion, he should GRANT that motion. It is a judge’s responsibility to GRANT those motions. Quite simply, it’s their job to uphold the Constitution!,” said lead counsel Jim Mermigis of the Mermigis Law Group.
“We are currently a dark period in NY and US history, with religious liberty under attack by secular authorities in partnership with the Pharmaceutical lobby, all across the country. Many legislators, and now some judges, seem to have forgotten that religious liberty, and the right to attend school, are fundamental rights -- rights which should not be for sale to Pharmaceutical corporations,” said co-counsel and President of www.firstfreedoms.org Kevin Barry.
“My children have already been kicked out of school. My family, and thousands of other families whose kids have been kicked out of public and private schools, take no solace in this Court’s “reluctance” in denying yet another motion aimed to get them back in school,” said Jocelyn Sullivan-Knapp, the Plaintiff in the case.
We asked the judge’s staff on December 16th why the one-page decision dated December 3rd was not released to us or to the public before December 16th. We have not received a reply as of December 18th.
Jim Mermigis Mermigislaw@gmail.com
Kevin Barry kb151@pm.me
December 18, 2019
On December 16th, we received notice that Judge Wiggins “reluctantly” denied our motion to reargue for a preliminary injunction, which would have allowed tens of thousands of healthy NY children to return to school while our trial challenging the constitutionality of NY’s religious exemption repeal law makes its way through the Courts.
We are disappointed and frustrated by this decision, but we are not surprised. We are currently evaluating all options, including appealing this decision, and will announce our next steps shortly.
In the decision, Judge Wiggins wrote that while he personally “may disagree with the (repeal) law,” Wiggins did not believe any law was “overlooked or misapprehended” when he denied our request for a preliminary injunction on October 9th. We strongly disagree.
In addition to case law cited in the denial motion, the Court overlooked and misapprehended both Article 1 Section 3 (religious liberty) and Article 11, Section 1 (right to school for ALL) of the NYS Constitution when initially denying the stay. We look forward to arguing this during the full trial in 2020. We believe we will prevail, and that the healthy children of the faithful will be back in school where they belong prior to the beginning of the 2020-21 school year.
We still believe there are judges in New York State willing to uphold the NYS Constitution and willing to stand up to the ruthless Albany Political Machine .
“In 20 years of practicing law, I have never experienced a judge writing that he ‘reluctantly’ denied a motion. If a judge is reluctant to deny a motion, he should GRANT that motion. It is a judge’s responsibility to GRANT those motions. Quite simply, it’s their job to uphold the Constitution!,” said lead counsel Jim Mermigis of the Mermigis Law Group.
“We are currently a dark period in NY and US history, with religious liberty under attack by secular authorities in partnership with the Pharmaceutical lobby, all across the country. Many legislators, and now some judges, seem to have forgotten that religious liberty, and the right to attend school, are fundamental rights -- rights which should not be for sale to Pharmaceutical corporations,” said co-counsel and President of www.firstfreedoms.org Kevin Barry.
“My children have already been kicked out of school. My family, and thousands of other families whose kids have been kicked out of public and private schools, take no solace in this Court’s “reluctance” in denying yet another motion aimed to get them back in school,” said Jocelyn Sullivan-Knapp, the Plaintiff in the case.
We asked the judge’s staff on December 16th why the one-page decision dated December 3rd was not released to us or to the public before December 16th. We have not received a reply as of December 18th.
Jim Mermigis Mermigislaw@gmail.com
Kevin Barry kb151@pm.me
| e2019-1338cv-jocelyn-sullivan-knapp-v-jocelyn-sullivan-knapp-decision---order-on-50_1_.pdf |
