PLAYPEN: Covid-19 Everything Political

[Alan Klein]

The rest of the story

https://www.witf.org/2020/09/14/judge-strikes-down-governor-tom-wolfs-pandemic-restrictions/

Courts had consistently rejected challenges to Wolf’s power to order businesses to close during the pandemic, and many other governors, Republican and Democrat, undertook similar measures as the virus spread across the country.

Wolf had eased many of the restrictions the plaintiffs objected to in their lawsuit — allowing businesses to reopen and canceling a statewide stay-at-home order — but the judge’s ruling noted that the administration had merely suspended those measures and could reimpose them at will.

While reopening its economy, Pennsylvania limited occupancy to 75% capacity at most businesses and 50% at theaters, gyms, salons and malls. It imposed even more restrictive measures on bars and restaurants, which the Wolf administration blamed for a summer spike in virus cases.

The judge said the plaintiffs did not challenge Wolf’s occupancy limits, and his ruling does not impact those orders. Nor did the lawsuit challenge the Wolf administration’s order requiring people to wear masks in public.

Another federal judge, U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick, recently dismissed parts of a separate lawsuit that challenged Wolf’s business shutdown. “We are skeptical of claims seeking to challenge emergency government action taken to combat a once-in-a-century global health crisis,” wrote Surrick, an appointee of President Bill Clinton.

Don't know anything about this case.  But for whatever it's worth, each state can have different rules.  Governors in some states may have the authority to act unilaterally.  In other states it may require the legislature to vote and act with the concurrence of the governor.  That's to avoid a dictatorial governor.

What happened in this case? 

[Robert Roaldi]

Well, I'm older than Trump.  But younger than Biden. 

Just what the country needs. Another septuagenarian on the brink of senility running for office.

But you might take better photos that either of them.

[TechTalk]

Legislative Oversight of Emergency Executive Powers

In times of war, disease or other extraordinary conditions, each state authorizes its governor to declare a state of emergency. Once an emergency has been declared, executive powers expand until the emergency ends. These powers include authority normally reserved for legislatures, such as the ability to suspend existing statutes or effectively create new laws—albeit temporarily and only as needed to respond to the emergency situation.

Although governors need to be able to respond to emergencies quickly, legislatures have an important role in making sure these powers are not abused or undermine the separation of powers vital to our democratic system of government. Legislatures exercise several types of checks on state executives' emergency authority in ways that vary between states. However, some common features exist.

Statutes defining executive authority during an emergency cannot be modified by executive order. Kind of like the fictional rule that a genie’s lamp can’t be used to wish for more wishes, governors can’t promulgate emergency rules that grant themselves authority beyond the statutory limits, even if they otherwise have the power to temporarily alter statutes. As a result, legislatures have the authority to legislate firm limits on emergency executive power. Several states impose specific limits on the exercise of emergency powers. Common restrictions include prohibiting governors from limiting freedom of the press or confiscating citizens' firearms. Additionally, constitutional limits on state authority and any guaranteed rights remain in full effect during an emergency.

Legislatures may retain the power to nullify an emergency proclamation by a resolution. In most cases, it takes a simple majority vote of both chambers. In Louisiana, an emergency declaration may be terminated by a resolution of either chamber. State laws may grant legislatures even greater oversight power by requiring legislative approval for an emergency to continue beyond a specified length of time. If a state's legislature is out of session during an emergency, some states will require the governor to call a special session. Alternatively, some statutes permit an interim committee or group of legislative leaders to extend or reject emergency proclamations.

The following table lists the statutes defining the legislature’s role in acting as a check on the emergency powers of the governors of every state, plus the District of Columbia, Guam, Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. As this is an emerging issue, a list of pending legislation is also featured on this page, below the table of statutes.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/legislative-oversight-of-executive-orders.aspx

More at:

https://www.nga.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/An-Assessment-of-State-Laws-Providing-Gubernatorial-Authority-to-Remove-Legal-Barriers-to-Emergency-Response.pdf

https://www.lawfareblog.com/state-emergency-authorities-address-covid-19

[Alan Klein]

Another thing to worry about. 

Risk of Severe Coronavirus Linked to Neanderthal Genes From 60,000 Years Ago
https://www.sciencealert.com/severe-coronavirus-has-been-linked-to-neanderthal-genes-from-60-000-years-ago

[LesPalenik]

It looks like the herd immunity didn't work out for them. That race passed some of their genes to humans and then completely vanished.

[Robert Roaldi]

Another thing to worry about. 

Not really anything new, it was always there, now we just have a name for it. All genetically-based illnesses have to do with some gene or other. The genes are inherited from somewhere on the evolutionary tree, chimps, garlic, dogs, etc. This is just another piece of the puzzle, I hope it's a useful piece.

[Alan Klein]

 

It looks like the herd immunity didn't work out for them. That race passed some of their genes to humans and then completely vanished.

Not really anything new, it was always there, now we just have a name for it. All genetically-based illnesses have to do with some gene or other. The genes are inherited from somewhere on the evolutionary tree, chimps, garlic, dogs, etc. This is just another piece of the puzzle, I hope it's a useful piece.

The issue described in the article is that only some people today have the Neanderthal gene.  People from Europe and South Asia.  I wonder if it's anyone here in LuLa? 

[Craig Lamson]

https://www.pennlive.com/coronavirus/2020/10/pa-gathering-limits-are-back-for-now-what-should-schools-do-for-friday-night-football-gov-wolf-stay-tuned.html

Pa. gathering limits are back for now; what should schools do for Friday night football? Gov. Wolf: ‘Stay tuned’

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Thursday that the Wolf administration’s coronavirus mitigation gathering limits -- 250 people at outdoor events and 25 at indoor ones -- are back in play again while the appeal process works itself through the court system. The news comes after U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV said in mid-September that the gathering limits were unconstitutional.

[Robert Roaldi]

The news comes after U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV said in mid-September that the gathering limits were unconstitutional.

You guys should get over yourselves. Seriously.

[Craig Lamson]

You guys should get over yourselves. Seriously.

Just getting in before....

[Alan Klein]

You guys should get over yourselves. Seriously.

What if Trump stopped protest marches by Black Lives Matter in order to prevent disease from spreading.  Should that be allowed? Would it be legal?

[LesPalenik]

The issue described in the article is that only some people today have the Neanderthal gene.  People from Europe and South Asia.  I wonder if it's anyone here in LuLa? 

Judging by some posts, for sure.

[Robert Roaldi]

What if Trump stopped protest marches by Black Lives Matter in order to prevent disease from spreading.  Should that be allowed? Would it be legal?

My complaint was about starting constitutional lawsuits when this is decidedly not really a constitutional matter, it's a fake made-up constitutional matter. Everyone clearly understands (or should) why emergency measures are in effect.

Stop playing the "what about" game. I don't think you want to go down the road of whose constitutional rights were most often and most egregiously violated.

[Alan Klein]

My complaint was about starting constitutional lawsuits when this is decidedly not really a constitutional matter, it's a fake made-up constitutional matter. Everyone clearly understands (or should) why emergency measures are in effect.

Stop playing the "what about" game. I don't think you want to go down the road of whose constitutional rights were most often and most egregiously violated.

I wasn't commenting on whose rights were being infringed more.  I was making a point that once you go down the road to giving government officials dictatorial powers for whatever reasons, than it becomes a slippery slope.  It could turn out that the very people you oppose could implement similar policies restaining rights such as stopping BLM marches or preventing a church group from congregating for religious services.  In both cases, a disease is the pretext for the unilateral power.  But the results are the same.  Both groups lose their freedoms. The BLM group rights to march and protest and freedom of speech.  The church group to practice their religion without government interference.

[Alan Klein]

What if after the disease is gone, a legislature grants its governor the right to restrict automobile usage to three days per week per car to reduce CO2 under the pretext that global warming requires extraordinary measure to maintain the planet's and people's health?  Slopes have a way of being slippery.

[MattBurt]

What if after the disease is gone, a legislature grants its governor the right to restrict automobile usage to three days per week per car to reduce CO2 under the pretext that global warming requires extraordinary measure to maintain the planet's and people's health?  Slopes have a way of being slippery.

Nice pivot from "What about" to "What if". I bet nobody will notice.

[William Walker]

No gloating please!

[faberryman]

I guess the first question, or maybe the only question, on everyone's mind is whether or not this is a stunt. Paging Dr. Kildare.

President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump test positive for Covid-19

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/01/politics/hope-hicks-positive-coronavirus/index.html

Then there was this comment: "Coronavirus tests positive for Donald Trump".

[LesPalenik]

Is is a real virus or just a fake one? Must have been those Chinese hackers who infected him. Or the lefties.
But nothing to worry about, White House is well stocked with Lysol. His and Melania's viruses will soon miraculously disappear.

[Robert Roaldi]

What if after the disease is gone, a legislature grants its governor the right to restrict automobile usage to three days per week per car to reduce CO2 under the pretext that global warming requires extraordinary measure to maintain the planet's and people's health?  Slopes have a way of being slippery.

They had restrictions about buying gasoline during the "energy crisis" in the 1970s, didn't they? You managed to survive that with your freedom intact, so I'm pretty sure that you could do it again. Have some faith.