• Face coverings will be mandatory for individuals 5 years of age and older for all indoor faith gatherings and, outdoors when 6 feet of physical distancing cannot be maintained.
• Previously, face coverings were required for ages 12 and older.
• All individuals attending indoor gatherings now need to wear face coverings (mask or face shield) at all times, even when teaching, preaching or singing. The only exemption is for someone playing an instrument requiring mouth to instrument contact.
  • Note - if you are not holding an in-person event, but are simply live streaming or recording services without an audience, face coverings for teachers, preachers and musicians are not required as long as 6 feet of physical distancing is maintained.
  Updated Gathering limits:
• Phase 1 Counties -
  • Indoor & Outdoor faith-based, civic and cultural gatherings = 50 people
  • Physical distancing of 6 feet between households must be maintained. To determine maximum occupancy, 35 square feet of space per person is needed in the room holding the gathering.
• Phase 2 Counties -
  • Services at an indoor venue = 100 people (including staff & volunteers)
  • Services at an outdoor venue = 250 people (including staff & volunteers)
  • Physical distancing of 6 feet between households must be maintained. To determine maximum occupancy, 35 square feet of space per person is needed in the room holding the gathering.
  Sector Specific Guidance & Resources:
  
  
• NEW! Face coverings website
• Phase 1 County faith communities, please utilize "Statewide Gatherings, Indoor Social Get-Together Guidance
."
• Phase 2 County faith communities, please utilize
  • "Venue & Event Operators" Guidance, and
  • "Gatherings" Guidance
  • FAQ - Faith Community guidance begins on page 5.
• School aged camps and youth groups, please utilize "Summertime Day Camps."

“...the state candidly admits that it does not have a shred of evidence that counter-protesters have ever, anywhere, kidnapped a protester or anyone associated with protests. Second, the asserted interest rests on an utterly implausible inference. The State’s reasoning is that counter-protesters, once they learn of seizures of protesters by federal agents, will dress up like police and go out on private missions to kidnap protesters. This despite the fact that such kidnappings are Measure 11 felonies in Oregon, punishable by mandatory minimum sentences of up to 70-90 years in prison.

I do not discount the animosity among these groups and had I been asked to assume that something would result in fist fights, or theft, or destruction of signs, or damage to vehicles, that would have made sense. But the idea that seizures by law enforcement will lead to kidnappings by private parties is a bridge too far.

I put in a similar category the State’s asserted interest in preventing a spate of cases in which protesters mistakenly think the federal agents who are seizing them are actually counter-protest kidnappers. Again, there is no evidence to support such an assertion. The State has not pointed to any instance in which a protester was subjected to state violence because she believed she was resisting a kidnapping. In both instances of a federal seizure it is either admitted or clearly visible that the agents’ uniforms say “Police.” The State further admitted at oral argument that, to its knowledge, counter-protesters have never dressed up as police. Draft.

Finally, the State’s asserted interest here fails the third prong of Lujan: redressability. The State’s requested solution to the kidnapping problem is to require actual federal agents to verbally identify themselves as such, presumably guaranteeing that they are the real deal. But if one is willing to go along with the State’s concerns about copycat kidnappers, it requires me to assume that such nefarious characters are willing to dress up like federal agents and willing to commit the very serious crime of kidnapping, but that they would blanch at the thought of identifying themselves as police. The requested remedy here is a linguistic Maginot line, of no use in the real world.

“We refuse to allow our streets to be a playground for political theatrics intended to deflect attention from the president’s failure to control a deadly pandemic. We will not stand by while violent actions exacerbate conditions on our streets.”

“Upon assuming office, we each took a vow to defend the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Oregon. We take that responsibility to heart. Confronted with clear evidence that federal agents are engaging in unconstitutional activities resulting in significant harm to individuals and our community as a whole, we are obligated to respond.”