New Jersey residents who filed a lawsuit over their refusal to wear face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic are looking to appeal their case after a federal appeals court ruled against them.
The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday ruled that refusing to wear the masks during a health emergency is not protected speech under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.
Attorneys for George Falcone and Gwyneth Murray-Nolan who brought two separate cases said they would appeal the decision and petition the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in, according to Fox News.
Falcone’s case was sent back to a lower court and the court said Murray-Nolan failed to show that she was retaliated against.
“A question shadowing suits such as these is whether there is a First Amendment right to refuse to wear a protective mask as required by valid health and safety orders put in place during a recognized public health emergency,” the court said in the ruling handed down Monday.
“Like all courts to address this issue, we conclude there is not,” read the decision on the cases revolving around the plaintiffs not wearing face masks during school board meetings.
“Skeptics are free to — and did — voice their opposition through multiple means, but disobeying a masking requirement is not one of them,” the court added. “One could not, for example, refuse to pay taxes to express the belief that ‘taxes are theft.’ Nor could one refuse to wear a motorcycle helmet as a symbolic protest against a state law requiring them.”
According to Fox News:
Falcone attended a Freehold Township school board meeting in early 2022 when masks were still required in the Garden State. He refused to adhere to the mask mandate and was issued a summons on a trespassing charge. He also claims a later school board meeting was canceled in response to him not wearing a mask. A lower court found his lawsuit did not have standing, so he appealed that ruling.
Murray-Nolan attended a Cranford school board meeting without a mask, also in early 2022, while a mask requirement was still in place. Less than a month later, at the board’s next meeting, she was arrested on a defiant trespass charge after attending without a mask. A lower court found police had probable cause to arrest her because she did not wear a mask despite a requirement under the law at the time, so she appealed.
Eric Harrison, an attorney representing the officials who were named in the suit, was pleased with the ruling, saying that the refusal to wear masks despite a government mandate “is not the sort of ‘civil disobedience’ that the drafters of the First Amendment had in mind as protected speech.”
The lawsuits were originally filed just before New Jersey ended its mask mandate in March 2022.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
Frieda@bizpacreview.com
Originally from New York, Powers graduated from New York University and eventually made her way to sunny South Florida where she has been writing for the BizPacReview team since 2015.
- 221 DEAD people received federal housing aid in Colorado— Trump admin. demands answers - December 18, 2025
- Cruise Line official pushes back on ‘nonsense’ drink package limit - December 18, 2025
- Border Patrol Chief and progressive mayor clash during street confrontation - December 18, 2025
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
