I dont disagree. Especially in the case of covid19.
However with that said, if we have to shut down national borders because of the next virus, why should states not be able to do the same thing?
Well to be fair to Lincoln, habeus corpus wasn’t the sacrosanct thing in the first part of the 1800’s that we want to treat it as now.
It got suspended all the time… not so much for white people… but it was violated a lot without the blink of an eye back then.
That’s funny.
Trump is trumping Dem leaders who are threatening to keep their cities and states locked down after Easter. He threatens to lock down a city, so Dems insist it’s a bad thing, unconstitutional. Now, when they later demand people stay at home and not go back to work, those Dem mayor’s and governors have already sunk their own boat.
1 Like
The Virginia Dental Association issued a recommendation, so it does not appear to have the force of law.
In Pennsylvania, the Department of Health has issued guidelines:
Before the Civil War the Bill of Rights and other rights in the constitution did not apply to states; the limitations on government power only applied to the federal government. On top of that, the Supreme Court ruled that African-Americans were not citizens.
Administrations have ignored court orders in the past. Sometimes it is easier to ask forgiveness than permission.
Agreed…
Not sure why an Obama thing was added at the end but whatever.
We are imposing a quarantine on planes from the New York area but not stopping anyone from coming here. Yet.
I went through that in 1981… The med-fly invasion iirc.
I included the recent example to show that recent administrations sometimes treat court orders as recommendations not as requirements.
Based on Cuomo’s comments, it would be likely that New York would immediately sue in federal court to stop enforcement of a federal quarantine. A ruling against the federal government could create political chaos even if there is ample precedent for administrations ignoring court orders in the past.
As a practical matter, a federal quarantine of the New York area would need at least tacit support of the states involved to be effective.
A friend of mine who is a nurse and actively performing corona virus tests on people can’t get tested unless she herself displays three symptoms, and she’s doing it with substandard protective gear.
Quarantining an entire State would be impossible.
You could quarantine, for the most part, NYC and Long Island, but the virus is already nationwide… so what would the point be?
I should add though, that one of the places where I used to live, The Outer Banks in NC, closed themselves off from outsiders a few weeks ago. Even property owners can’t get there.
Given their very limited health system, it seems like the right move.
Government exerted its authority in previous pandemics.
We always got any temporary “loss of freedoms” back.
But of course this time will be different because of course it’s not about trying to slow down disease transmission but to make you a slave to government.
Hell I’m even seeing posts about the stupid “FEMA detention centers” online again.
What is happened is that more states are requiring people from the New York area to self-quarantine if they come into the state.
Governors in Texas, Florida, Maryland and South Carolina this week ordered people arriving from the New York area —including New Jersey and Connecticut — and other virus hot spots to self-quarantine for at least 14 days upon arrival.
The pattern is similar to what happened in Europe. Freedom of movement was a fundamental EU right, but now each member state is sealing its borders.
The EU is an economic union, not a political one.
It is near impossible to restrict free travel between States.
People arriving can be “ordered” to self quarantine but any criminal penalty would be unconstitutional.
Too bad we don’t have widespread testing in place to determine who is infected and who isn’t.
This admin is always 2 weeks behind the curve on all of this. Reacting after ■■■■ starts getting bad. Closing the barn door after the horse has bolted.
3 Likes
There is ample precedent for quarantines. The exact limits of government enforcement have not been defined.
People who intentionally spread the virus can be charged under federal terrorism statutes:
UPDATE: Rhode Island has made its mandatory quarantine order apply to all visitors to the state, not just New Yorkers, after Cuomo and the ACLU threatened to sue in federal court.
Interesting discussion about the legalities but the realities will trump the legalities in this situation.
There is no way that people will comply with total lockdowns. Young and old are all violating county and state stay at home orders wherever they are implemented. Quarantines will help with flattening the curve some, but not viable - a large can of worms. Bottom line, we will eventually face the fact that victory will be defined as living with a manageable level of risk.
What that level Of risk is defined as depends on success of meds being tested, post-med mortality rates, and the state of the economy. Eventually a vaccine will be approved (and maybe early via right-to-try).
I believe the manageable risk theme will prevail nationwide by July 1st and maybe sooner if meds are “very“ successful.
Without adequate testing, the quarantine will not hold.
Separate the infected from the uninfected… fine. But to assume that everyone is infected… not going to hold up.
