Justice Delayed in the COVID-19 Era: Injunctions, Mootness, and Religious Freedom in the United States Legal System

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed critical deficiencies in the United States’ legal system’s handling of emergency injunctions, particularly concerning religious freedom. This article examines the challenges courts faced in balancing public health measures with constitutional rights, focusing on the use of shadow dockets and the frequent dismissal of cases due to mootness. Analyzing key Supreme Court decisions and lower court rulings, we highlight the inconsistencies and delays that arose when addressing First Amendment challenges to pandemic-related restrictions. Arguments for procedural reforms, including expedited hearings and avoiding mootness dismissals in cases of national importance, are provided to protect fundamental rights during future public health crises.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Laws
Published
2025-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14040045
Primary Topic
American Constitutional Law and Politics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Justice Delayed in the COVID-19 Era: Injunctions, Mootness, and Religious Freedom in the United States Legal System

Tammy S. Garland, Karen McGuffee, Sherah L. Basham
Laws
American Constitutional Law and Politics
article

Justice Delayed in the COVID-19 Era: Injunctions, Mootness, and Religious Freedom in the United States Legal System

Tammy S. Garland, Karen McGuffee, Sherah L. Basham
article en

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed critical deficiencies in the United States’ legal system’s handling of emergency injunctions, particularly concerning religious freedom. This article examines the challenges courts faced in balancing public health measures with constitutional rights, focusing on the use of shadow dockets and the frequent dismissal of cases due to mootness. Analyzing key Supreme Court decisions and lower court rulings, we highlight the inconsistencies and delays that arose when addressing First Amendment challenges to pandemic-related restrictions. Arguments for procedural reforms, including expedited hearings and avoiding mootness dismissals in cases of national importance, are provided to protect fundamental rights during future public health crises.

LawsVol. 14(4)
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
American Constitutional Law and Politics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.