In several minutes we'll go live to talk with legal experts about #COVID. Follow #ACS2020 for live updates and watch the livestream here: acslaw.org/2020-acs-natio…
ACS Board of Advisors member @RonaldKlain: dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic requires us to answer some hard legal questions #ACS2020
Legal debates around COVID-19 aren't theoretical or abstract. These are questions of life or death. -- @RonaldKlain#ACS2020
.@steve_vladeck observes that the president harbors some hostility "in principle" to the federal government playing an aggressive role in dealing with the #COVID crisis -- e.g., enacting the Defense Production Act, the Stafford Act #ACS2020
Historically, health crises--like COVID-19--have been used as a proxies for racial discrimination, notes @michelebgoodwin#ACS2020
.@DBRodriguez5 notes that state and federal courts have adapted in face of #COVID19, but are struggling to balance deference to states and localities to address public health with our civil rights and liberties
.@mearest -- Participation in criminal legal system is intimately tied to weak social safety net, poor public health and education, lack of housing and employment. #ACS2020
.@mearest asks: How will policing be impacted in places with less stringent stay at home orders and masking requirements, particularly how they police the protests and demonstrations we are seeing everyday? #ACS2020
.@michelebgoodwin notes historically, public health has been a racist, classist trope based in eugenics. Our current measures must be driven by science because otherwise, government will use public health to implement discriminatory aims
How will courts' response to invocation of public health to justify imposing restrictions? @steve_vladeck says courts have been inconsistent so far #ACS2020
.@mearest Public health restrictions are the new broken taillight. Armed first responders are ill equipped to deal with issues facing overpoliced communities during this pandemic and more harshly enforce public health restrictions against them.
.@DBRodriguez5 highlights that the existing landscape of employment, insurance, and tort law are not well equipped to deal with this pandemic
.@michelebgoodwin: 4 out of 5 latinx folks are considered essential workers, but many of these are the same people that have been targeted by our immigration regime in the most heinous type of ways.
There is so much more the fed gov't could do to respond to violence against communities of color and help states and localities employ science, public health approaches, and data to address it, says @mearest.
The medical evidence shows that it's quite dangerous to put pregnant persons in a position where abortion would be denied in the midst of a pandemic, notes @michelebgoodwin#ACS2020#COVID__19
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
ICYMI: “A More Perfect Union: The Future of Labor Law in a Post-COVID Economy” took place yesterday (1/7)
We need labor law reform. We need sector-wide solutions to address the multiple crises of the environment, the healthcare system, the economic crisis, said Nicole Berner of @SEIU (2/7)
Labor law has become an obstacle for workers to come together and countervail the power of corporations, said @sharblock (3/7)
In a new blog post on our expert forum, @MyConstitution’s David Gans explores California v. Texas, the latest attempt in the long-running effort by conservatives to strike down the entire Affordable Care Act bit.ly/3klf20x (1/5)
“Both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh—who together with the Court’s three more liberal Justices could form a majority—repeatedly stated that it would be inappropriate to strike down the statute as a whole.” (2/5)
Gans argues that while the Roberts Court is deeply conservative, for now it seems unwilling to upend settled legal principles to strike down the ACA. (3/5)
From our first issue brief by Kristina Silja Bennard back in 2005 (!) on the confirmation hearings of #RBG and answering questions while maintaining judicial impartiality (1/21)
Bennard: The hearings for #RBG in 1993 provide a good example of how a nominee balances her obligation of impartiality with the need to shed light on her fundamental views (3/21)
.@espinsegall in the ACS Expert Forum Blog: Judge Amy Coney Barrett stated during her confirmation hearings that she's an originalist, which is meaningless as it relates to interpretation, but suggests that she'll consistently cast conservative votes acslaw.org/expertforum/ju… (1/9)
There are conservative, moderate and liberal judges, but there are no originalist judges, Professor Segall argues (2/9)
In the 1970s and 80s, originalists like Robert Bork were opposed to judges overturning state & federal law absent a clear inconsistency with constitutional text (3/9)
ACS President @russfeingold released this statement as the Senate begins hearings for #SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett (1/8):
The illegitimate plan to seat another extremely conservative #SCOTUS justice will allow the Right to achieve their ultimate goal: locking down a supermajority that could last for a generation (2/8)
By doing so, the Right will effectively steal the future of the younger generation – and generations to come. This generation will not be able to forge its own way or make manifest the promises in our Constitution (3/8)