Oregon bureaucrat overrides 1st Amendment? How to gut gov’t bullies

It’s no surprise that a lowly state bureaucrat believes he can wield more power than the Oregon and United States Constitutions combined. Given the recent Supreme Court opinions that illegally upheld anti-(not just un-)Constitutional actions by government, these actions of a state employee only seem natural. Administrative punishments, like those levied against Christian bakery owners in Oregon, are becoming commonplace. However, they are not acceptable. The question becomes rhetorical as to how the people, the majority, are allowing themselves to be buffaloed by a small fraction of the population harboring a vendetta against the social norm. That a minor appointee to a regulatory board (which is defined as a few people who independently decide the implementation of law according to their biases) thinks he can ignore the state constitution, which he took an oath to uphold, is irrational.

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry orders against individuals – the Kleins of Sweet Cakes by Melissa – not only demanded that they act contrary to their religious convictions, but that they keep mum about the extortion. The administrative rulings by BOLI punishing the Kleins for not providing a service were unconstitutional according to both the First Amendment and these articles of the Oregon Constitution:

• Section 2. Freedom of worship. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.—
• Section 3. Freedom of religious opinion. No law shall in any case whatever control the free exercise, and enjoyment of religeous [sic] opinions, or interfere with the rights of conscience.—
• Section 20. Equality of privileges and immunities of citizens. No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.—

It is evident that the puny-minded BOLI concluded that the bakery discriminated against two people who, apparently, were attempting to act illegally in that same-sex marriage wasn’t authorized in Oregon at the time the order for a wedding cake was placed. In effect, the couple was asking the Kleins to subvert their beliefs as well as snub the state, becoming scofflaws. There is nothing about this whole affair that passes the test of legitimacy, from the “injured” couple taking some eight months to decide they were harmed, to BOLI deciding the so-called harm should literally cost the Klein’s their business.

---

Finally, the Kleins’ lawyers are on the right track. To bolster the conclusion that the administrative court proceeding carries no weight in law is an injunction placed by U.S. District Court Judge Leigh Martin May against the SEC for railroading businessman Charles Hill with a fine that would bankrupt him. What the Kleins’ lawyers are deliberating is how to remove the case from the administrative system and into the judicial system. They may wish to consider this… It appears that the administrative process may have been exhausted, placing BOLI, after making its final ruling, in a position of allowing the Kleins to sue. The Sackett v. EPA decision substantiates the valuable application of the Administrative Procedure Act in coming against government agencies. BOLI has violated both state and national constitutions and obstructed the Oregon couple’s rights of free expression of religion and free speech, for the purpose of extorting money and inflicting emotional damage. There is also the Hobby Lobby ruling that supported entrepreneurs of sincere faith to conduct business accordingly, without being forced to violate that faith. Unfortunately, most individuals, who have been denied relief or targeted by government agencies, bypass the administrative process of submitting a claim for damages, which in the Oregon Code is under §30.275, “Notice of claim; time of notice; time of action.” Whether or not this was done or yet needs be done is for the Kleins’ attorneys to decide. (By the way, since this information was downloaded from the Oregon State website, the site has again been redesigned and locating the Oregon Code is nearly impossible for us average folks. It took my legal researcher and I approximately three hours to find it two years ago. That particular web address no longer works, but this was just found.) What is ever-important in this whole sordid affair of belligerency by appointed bureaucrats seeking to execute a personal agenda, is the Kleins’ willingness to stand by their convictions. They are an example to other Christians who fear the oppressors of this world and somehow believe that Christianity must be made more “relevant” to today, as a fellow believer recently shared. Regretfully, I must disagree with the assumption that Christianity lacks relevancy in the modern age. It is, in truth, more relevant than ever as providing spiritual guidance in a relativistic world. James 1:22-251 calls for believers to embrace the Word and take action upon it; to not forget the reflection of the imperfect person we see in the mirror but realize Gods’ working within us to reflect His Son, and moving us to want to act as He directs. This is not about acting by our own efforts or according to our own wishes but opening our hearts to allow God to work through us as His emissary. Walk the talk. The Kleins have stayed true to their faith and, according to both Constitutions, they have acted properly within their rights of expressing that faith. As the Oregon Constitution states that, “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens,” apparently it must be reiterated that this applies to all citizens including, not excluding, the Kleins. Schizophrenic states like Oregon must desist from passing laws and ordinances that counter their own Constitution, nullifying it and instituting anarchy in its place. SCOTUS should also get this message. Footnote:

1. James 1:22 KJV - But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. 23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: 24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. 25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

A. Dru Kristenev with thanks to Toddy Littman’s instruction, which, prayerfully, was correctly applied.