Blue Laws in the Philippines

All loans are granted under a supervised loan under the law of the Republic numbered sixty-three second lieutenants or other laws or under the supervision of a project. Some lower courts have struck down blue laws in other states, largely because they found they violated the settlement clause. A New York Criminal Court in People v. Yafee (2004) struck down a blue law restricting the sale of alcohol on Sundays, writing: In the Kingdom of Tonga, the Codex Vavaʻu (1839) was a form of blue law inspired by the teachings of Methodist missionaries. With the introduction of the Tongan Constitution on the 4th. In June 1875, the sixth clause stated: “The Sabbath is sanctified in Tonga, and no one may exercise his profession on the Sabbath or engage in a commercial enterprise except as required by law; and any agreement entered into or witnessed on that day is null and void and has no legal effect. The origin of the term “blue laws” leads to a historical dispute. According to David N. Laband and Deborah Hendry Heinbuch in their book Blue Laws: The History, Economics, and Politics of Sunday-Closing Laws, a common explanation for the term is that the laws of the new Haven colony were printed on blue paper in the late 17th century. The book quotes other historians who say the term comes from the term “True Blue” and refers to people who do not change their beliefs or policies. “Blue is therefore the color of permanence and fidelity,” write Laband and Heinbuch. Still others argue that the term was coined by critics to ridicule efforts to prevent “blue” or indecent behaviors such as alcohol consumption and fornication.

Beginning in the mid-19th century, religious and ethnocultural minorities arrested for violating state and local blue laws appealed their convictions to the state`s highest courts. In Specht v. Commonwealth (Pa. 1848), for example, German Seventh-day Baptists in Pennsylvania employed attorney Thaddeus Stevens to question the constitutionality of the Pennsylvania Sunday law. [46] As in cases in other states, litigants pointed to provisions in state constitutions protecting religious freedom, arguing that Sunday laws were a flagrant violation. While these constitutional challenges have generally failed (most state supreme courts have upheld the constitutionality of Sunday laws), they have helped create a model for subsequent minorities to seek to protect religious freedom and minority rights. [47] In Canada, the Sunday League, a Roman Catholic Sunday league, supported the Lord`s Day Act in 1923 and promoted a Sabbatarian law on the first day. [20] [Failure of the review] [21] Beginning in the 1840s, workers, Jews, Seventh-day Baptists, freethinkers, and other groups began to organize opposition. Throughout the century, Sunday laws fueled controversy between church and state and contributed to the emergence of modern American minority rights policies. [22] On the other hand, the most recent Dies Domini, written by Pope John Paul II in 1998, advocates Sunday legislation because it protects civil servants and workers; The 2011 Catholic Conference of North Dakota also affirmed that the Blue Laws, in accordance with the Compendium of The Church`s Social Doctrine, “ensure that citizens are not denied time for rest and divine worship for reasons of economic productivity.” [23] Similarly, while acknowledging the partially religious origin of the Blue Laws, Chief Justice Earl Warren recognized the “secular purpose they served by providing workers with an advantage while increasing the productivity of labor.” [24] The two most cited opinions are McGowan and Braunfeld. The McGowan case came after several employees of the Maryland department store were convicted and fined for selling items such as a stapler, loose-leaf backrest and floor wax. Maryland`s Blue Law banned the sale of most items on Sundays, with the exception of tobacco, milk, bread, gas and some other products.

Proponents argue that the Blue Laws serve valid secular purposes, such as providing a uniform day of rest and reducing police workload (in the case of laws restricting the sale of alcohol and the potential law enforcement problems that result). Supreme Court Decisions In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court issued four opinions challenging Sunday laws in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts on the basis of the 14th anniversary equality clause. The amendment and the first amendment to the freedom of religion clauses were rejected. These are McGowan v. Maryland, Braunfeld v. Brown, Gallagher v. Crown Kosher Super Market of Massachusetts and Two Guys from Harrison-Allentown, Inc. v. McGinley.

However, other courts have upheld the constitutionality of the blue laws. Since 2007, blue laws have been enacted, which has led to the closure of shops on the 13 public holidays in Poland – these are both religious and secular rest days. In 2014, an initiative by the Law and Justice party failed to pass reading in the Diet to ban trade on Sundays and public holidays. However, since 2018, the ruling government and the President of Poland have signed a law that will reduce retail trade from March 1, 2018 to the first and last Sunday of the month, Palm Sunday, March 3 and 4. Sunday of Advent as well as the limited trade until 14:00 for Easter Saturday and Christmas Eve. In 2019, the restriction was extended and trade was only allowed on the last Sunday of the month, as well as Palm Sunday, the 3rd and 4th Sundays of Advent, as well as trade until 2 p.m. for Easter Saturday and Christmas Eve. From 2020, stores can only be open 7 Sundays a year: Palm Sunday, 3rd and 4th Sunday of Advent, last Sunday of January, April, June and August as well as until 14:00 for Easter Saturday and Christmas Eve. [33] Due to restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2nd Sunday of Advent was then added as a shopping day. [34] Most of the remaining blue laws regulate the sale of alcohol, but the number of states with such laws is decreasing. In 2022, 28 states had some sort of restrictions on the sale of alcohol on Sunday.

In Braunfeld v. Brown (1961), the court ruled that states can apply blue laws to those, in this case Orthodox Jews, who also closed their shops on Saturdays for religious reasons. In Denmark, closure laws restricting retail trade on Sundays were abolished with effect from 1 October 2012. From that moment on, retail trade is only limited on public holidays (New Year`s Day, Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, Easter Monday, Prayer Day, Ascension Day, Pentecost Sunday, Whit Monday, Christmas Day and Boxing Day) and Constitution Day, Christmas Eve and New Year`s Eve (only on New Year`s Eve from 3 p.m.). On these days, almost all shops remain closed. The exceptions are bakeries, diyers, garden centres, petrol stations and small supermarkets. [25] Certainly, the controversy over the blue laws will continue. In the United States, judges defended blue laws “in terms of secular benefits for workers,” noting that “laws are essential to social welfare.” [38] In 1896, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Johnson Field commented on Sunday laws:[38] In the United States, the Supreme Court upheld Blue laws as constitutional, recognized their religious origins, but cited secular justifications that resulted, particularly the provision of a day of rest for the general population.

[9] [10] In the meantime, various state courts have struck down the laws either as unenforceable or as a violation of their state constitutions. In response, state lawmakers have re-enacted some Sunday laws to comply with the rulings, while some of the other laws are allowed to remain in effect with no intention of enforcing them. [11] Some laws apply to trade in general, while others target specific business practices. For example, a Michigan law specifically prohibits pawnshops from operating on Sundays. A North Carolina law prohibits hunting on Sundays. Most of the Court`s analysis concerned the establishment clause. The judges acknowledged that the original purpose of the Sunday closure laws was religious in nature: “It is not disputed that the original laws dealing with Sunday work were motivated by religious forces.” However, the court noted that the laws now serve secular purposes, including setting a day off “where people can recover from past work of the week and prepare physically and mentally for the upcoming work of the week.” In terms of culture, the impact of the disappearance of blue laws could be greater. A 2006 study in New Mexico found a sharp increase in drunk driving on Sundays after that state lifted its Sunday ban on selling packaged alcohol. A larger study published in 2008 by economists at MIT and Notre Dame found that the repeal of the Blue Laws led to a decline in church attendance, a decrease in donations to churches, and an increase in alcohol and drug use among religious people. These far-reaching effects cannot easily be attributed to specific causes, but one of the authors of this latest study, Daniel Hungerman, suggested to Christianity Today that the Blue Laws may have fulfilled their original intention of keeping people pious.

[45] Critics accuse the laws of being economically burdensome and violating the religious freedom clauses of the First Amendment. Some argue that the laws violate the free exercise clause by imposing a disadvantage on those whose Sabbath is not on Sunday, while others argue that the laws violate the settlement clause by supporting and advancing Christianity. Still others say that the laws – although they are of religious origin – are now justified by secular purposes. In the 21st century, states have begun to ease restrictions and, in some cases, repeal Sunday blue laws altogether.