Constitutional Amendment AJR10 - “Freedom to gather in places of worship during an emergency."

The Democratic Party of Wisconsin and its county affiliates urge voters to mark "no" on three constitutional amendments placed on the 2026, November 3rd, ballot by Republican legislators. One proposed amendment concerns gatherings in places of worship during declared emergencies.

Assembly Joint Resolution 10 will appear on the ballot as follows: “Question (X): “Freedom to gather in places of worship during an emergency. Shall section 18 of article I of the constitution, which deals with religious liberty, be amended to prohibit the state or a political subdivision of the state from ordering the closure of, or forbidding gatherings in, places of worship in response to a state of emergency, including a public health emergency?” 

Religious liberty is a fundamental right; however, this amendment goes beyond protecting the freedom to worship by permanently restricting the ability of state and local officials to respond to serious, immediate threats at places of worship during crises. Emergency measures should be lawful, evidence-based, temporary, and subject to judicial review. They should not be categorically prohibited by the state Constitution, regardless of the circumstances. 

The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated why officials need the flexibility to respond quickly to rapidly changing threats. To slow transmission and reduce pressure on hospitals and public health services, state and local governments adopted various stay-at-home policies. PBS reported that approximately 90% of the U.S. population was subject to such measures at one point. Pew Research Center polling also found broad bipartisan support for restricting gatherings of more than 10 people, including support from 82% of Republicans and 95% of Democrats. Subsequent scientific reviews found that measures such as physical distancing, stay-at-home policies, travel restrictions, and temporary closures helped reduce COVID-19 transmission.

According to the World Health Organization, large indoor gatherings posed particular risks because COVID-19 could spread through close and prolonged contact, especially in poorly ventilated spaces. Worship services were not uniquely responsible for transmission, but they presented many of the same risks as other large indoor gatherings.

Wisconsin's Safer-at-Home orders did not prohibit religious practice. Emergency Orders #8,  #12, an associated FAQ, and memo classified religious entities as essential organizations and permitted them to continue operating, subject to public health requirements. State guidance encouraged safer alternatives, including drive-in services, small and physically distanced gatherings, outdoor services, telephone and video participation, and prerecorded services.

Religious organizations received treatment that was less restrictive than that imposed on many businesses and organizations classified as nonessential. Additionally, individuals and families remained free to worship at home, and religious gatherings could continue when conducted in accordance with applicable safety requirements. Nevertheless, Republican legislators continue to argue that emergency orders infringed upon religious freedom, a dispute which now forms the basis of the proposed constitutional amendment.

The issue extends beyond pandemics. Emergencies may involve severe weather, fires, hazardous-material incidents, violence, or other immediate dangers. In such circumstances, officials may need to temporarily close buildings, restrict access to dangerous areas, or limit gatherings until a threat has passed. Places of worship are not immune from tornadoes, floods, fires, outbreaks, or security threats. A constitutional amendment that categorically limits emergency action could make it harder for officials to protect worshippers and surrounding communities.

Wisconsinites should not have to choose between religious liberty and public safety. Both can be protected through narrowly tailored emergency measures, judicial oversight, and equal treatment under the law. Writing an inflexible restriction into the Wisconsin Constitution would remove options that may be necessary in a future crisis, even when officials face clear evidence of an immediate danger.

For these reasons, Wisconsin voters should vote "no" on the proposed amendment concerning gatherings in places of worship.