Oh I would say they do have the power to close businesses, however, it’s not an unlimited one and has to meet a strict scrutiny standard as to whether or not it’s warranted. If Stanford is right, and the true mortality rate is ten times lower than the flu, it isn’t.
WuWei: SottoVoce: zantax: SottoVoce: zantax: SottoVoce:Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health
Keep that case in mind in regard to something similar, Trump shutting down immigration. In addition, 1902 predates the bill of rights incorporation to the states.
What are you referring to as predating the incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the states? The fourteenth amendment? That happened in 1868, 34 years before 1902.
Sure the fourteenth, but the first and second weren’t incorporated until after 1902.
That case was filed on the basis of the 14th Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the Constitution itself. First and second amendments played no role.
Played no role?
Read the filing. Freely available.
It doesn’t matter “the basis on which it was filed”, the Constitution as a whole always plays a role. The other was not incorporated at the time, as has been pointed out.
Obamacare was defended as a penalty, not a tax.
While I do believe there is some serious over reach in our response, particularly in some states, if the General Welfare clause does not cover pandemics, it doesn’t cover anything.
It doesn’t cover anything. The historical record clearly shows it granted no powers not enumerated elsewhere to the government.
zantax: WuWei: SottoVoce: zantax: SottoVoce: zantax: SottoVoce:Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health
Keep that case in mind in regard to something similar, Trump shutting down immigration. In addition, 1902 predates the bill of rights incorporation to the states.
What are you referring to as predating the incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the states? The fourteenth amendment? That happened in 1868, 34 years before 1902.
Sure the fourteenth, but the first and second weren’t incorporated until after 1902.
That case was filed on the basis of the 14th Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the Constitution itself. First and second amendments played no role.
Played no role?
Played no role in 1902, which predates their being incorporated to the states.
Lol. Read the case. A case is brought to a court based on a legal question. That’s how these things work. You make a specific challenge. In this case the plaintiffs questioned the legality of the quarantine based on the 14th Amendment and Commerce Clause. The 1st and 2nd Amendments played no role.
So your contention is that the court ignores the rest of the Constitution when addressing the filing?
Nemesis:For everyone who thinks this is unconstitutional please just open your business. Instead of complaining about your rights being infringed stand by your convictions.
Legal consequences will not be a concern because I am sure you will be victorious in court by using the arguments expressed in a variety of posts over the past few weeks.
No need to. Things are starting to open up in a number of states.
Tn is opening up the 30th. Ga this friday. There are a number of others.
It is great to see states reopening. Obviously this has to happen at some point. with a cautious Open and still utilizing social distancing lets hope a further shutdown is not needed.
The next four- six weeks will be critical
The next four- six weeks will be critical
Why?
…
Nemesis:The next four- six weeks will be critical
Why?
…
Sigh - because we will know if the virus will take hold in these communities an if it has a resurgence.
If it doesn’t all good and well but if it does then I am sure state governors will take quick and decisive action.
WuWei: Nemesis:The next four- six weeks will be critical
Why?
…Sigh - because we will know if the virus will take hold in these communities an if it has a resurgence.
If it doesn’t all good and well but if it does then I am sure state governors will take quick and decisive action.
Sigh. And do what?
gooddad409: Nemesis:For everyone who thinks this is unconstitutional please just open your business. Instead of complaining about your rights being infringed stand by your convictions.
Legal consequences will not be a concern because I am sure you will be victorious in court by using the arguments expressed in a variety of posts over the past few weeks.
No need to. Things are starting to open up in a number of states.
Tn is opening up the 30th. Ga this friday. There are a number of others.
It is great to see states reopening. Obviously this has to happen at some point. with a cautious Open and still utilizing social distancing lets hope a further shutdown is not needed.
The next four- six weeks will be critical
I tend to agree. Some of the local folks never distanced. Mostly 20’s and 30’s age wise.
Many acted like it was just a jolly long holiday. I base that on seeing dozens of them on the walking paths no masks, no distancing or anything.
See them from my car.
I drive out to my daughters to walk these days. In the boonies and have met nobody at all on that little road she lives on yet.
Nemesis: gooddad409: Nemesis:For everyone who thinks this is unconstitutional please just open your business. Instead of complaining about your rights being infringed stand by your convictions.
Legal consequences will not be a concern because I am sure you will be victorious in court by using the arguments expressed in a variety of posts over the past few weeks.
No need to. Things are starting to open up in a number of states.
Tn is opening up the 30th. Ga this friday. There are a number of others.
It is great to see states reopening. Obviously this has to happen at some point. with a cautious Open and still utilizing social distancing lets hope a further shutdown is not needed.
The next four- six weeks will be critical
I tend to agree. Some of the local folks never distanced. Mostly 20’s and 30’s age wise.
Many acted like it was just a jolly long holiday. I base that on seeing dozens of them on the walking paths no masks, no distancing or anything.
See them from my car.
I drive out to my daughters to walk these days. In the boonies and have met nobody at all on that little road she lives on yet.
Its crazy how people dont take this seriously. If we all social distanced, made sensible choices then getting through this would be quicker and less painful.
The economy is in a bad situation and people are hurting. Not to minimize anyones hard times but this is a pandemic and we have never faced anything like this before in our lifetimes.
It is great to see how the communities in my area have come together. Maybe there will be some positives after this is all done.
Nemesis: WuWei: Nemesis:The next four- six weeks will be critical
Why?
…Sigh - because we will know if the virus will take hold in these communities an if it has a resurgence.
If it doesn’t all good and well but if it does then I am sure state governors will take quick and decisive action.
Sigh. And do what?
You know very well what they need to do so I am not going to answer that question. If I do all you will do is ask another question and not actually discuss anything.
Nope. The court evaluates the facts of the case and the merit of the complaint. If additional laws are considered they may do so.
However, if the courts don’t have the power to interpret law, why would they include other laws in order to make a judgment on how it pertains to another? Why should they interpret one law in the context of another?
WuWei: Nemesis: WuWei: Nemesis:The next four- six weeks will be critical
Why?
…Sigh - because we will know if the virus will take hold in these communities an if it has a resurgence.
If it doesn’t all good and well but if it does then I am sure state governors will take quick and decisive action.
Sigh. And do what?
You know very well what they need to do so I am not going to answer that question. If I do all you will do is ask another question and not actually discuss anything.
Shut it all down again and really mean it this time.
Nope. The court evaluates the facts of the case and the merit of the complaint. If additional laws are considered they may do so.
However, if the courts don’t have the power to interpret law, why would they include other laws in order to make a judgment on how it pertains to another? Why should they interpret one law in the context of another?
Because the whole Constitution applies.
Again, “interpret” doesn’t appear in Article 3. It may not appear anywhere.
Nemesis: WuWei: Nemesis: WuWei: Nemesis:The next four- six weeks will be critical
Why?
…Sigh - because we will know if the virus will take hold in these communities an if it has a resurgence.
If it doesn’t all good and well but if it does then I am sure state governors will take quick and decisive action.
Sigh. And do what?
You know very well what they need to do so I am not going to answer that question. If I do all you will do is ask another question and not actually discuss anything.
Shut it all down again and really mean it this time.
Yes I thought that was clear. Depending on what happens will dictate what actions need to be taken. No one knows what is going to happen over the next few weeks. The cautious approach is the right one.
don’t give a tinkers damn about the historical record. the text is pretty clear.
Plenty more out there. Here’s a summary.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/RL31333.pdf
I realize that neither this, nor any source, will suffice.
That document references to quarantining a person infected with a disease. I believe we are talking about state powers to arbitrarily close down any or all businesses it see fit, and force healthy people into quarantine against their will.
I think we all understand the public health laws which would allow the state to quarantine a person who had Ebola, or small pox, etc… This discussion does not seem to be about that.
Yes I thought that was clear. Depending on what happens will dictate what actions need to be taken. No one knows what is going to happen over the next few weeks. The cautious approach is the right one.
We’ll have to show 'em we mean BUSINESS!
It is great to see states reopening. Obviously this has to happen at some point. with a cautious Open and still utilizing social distancing lets hope a further shutdown is not needed.
The next four- six weeks will be critical
The next six to ten months will be critical, since we do not have a working vaccine, nor do we have a agreed upon treatment for this virus.
We sure as hell cannot force the entire nation to stay in house lock down, because we’d cause more injury than the virus.
SottoVoce:Nope. The court evaluates the facts of the case and the merit of the complaint. If additional laws are considered they may do so.
However, if the courts don’t have the power to interpret law, why would they include other laws in order to make a judgment on how it pertains to another? Why should they interpret one law in the context of another?
Because the whole Constitution applies.
Again, “interpret” doesn’t appear in Article 3. It may not appear anywhere.
Ok. Where is the phrase “states do not have the authority to close businesses” appear in the Constitution. Not your interpretation, not a courts interpretation, not a legal scholars interpretation, not an interpretation of a definition. Those exact, express words. I guess by your criteria it’s a pretty open and closed case. Thanks for that.