Now that the pandemic is starting to abate, it's time for legislatures to completely overhaul state statutes authorizing the powers state governors & health authorities have to respond to a health emergency. These laws are seldom used & they need to be modernized & clarified. /1
The states have the power to deal with health emergencies - in ways that the federal govt DOES NOT. This is true about many things beyond health. It is part of the division of powers in our federalist system of govt. /2
But the state executive's powers are not unlimited. They are limited by at least three things: 1. people's constitutional rights (state & federal), 2. state statutes passed by the legislature, & 3. the factual context of the situation (the flu is not ebola for example.) /3
These powers are thus flexible - they are supposed to be - in order to both respond to the facts on the ground & respect the rights of the people. It is the legislature's job to give guidance to the executive - by statutes - as to how to balance these concerns. /4
In theory, the courts are a check on these powers, again in three ways: 1. to protect constitutional rights, 2. to enforce statutory provisions, & 3. ensure the actions have a factual basis. In practice, the courts did not perform so well in this pandemic (an understatement.) /5
Given the courts' failures to do their jobs, the often antiquated & untested nature of the existing statutes & regulations, & the cultural changes we've undergone since the 1918 pandemic, it is imperative that the legislatures take action & revise the state statutory schemes.
One thing that urgently needs to be clarified is that it is the politicians- not health officials - who must be making the decisions. They can be informed by the health officials’ views for sure, but that is not the only consideration. Rather, it is one of many to be considered.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As many of you know, I have the privilege to represent Carter, along w/a team of other lawyers, in his case against the govt & former govt officials. Although there are limits to what we can say publicly, there are some things we can share. /1
The case is still in its early stages even though we filed it in Nov 2020 because of the procedural rights given to the govt & former govt officials in federal court. This coming week, however, the defendants will be filing their responses to our Complaint. /2
The defense pleadings are likely to be Motions to Dismiss to try to get the case thrown out on (probably very) technical grounds, rather than the formal Answers to the Complaint. This procedural step is normal in federal civil litigation. /3
I’ve done State security clearance cases for decades. I’ve never seen one that was unjustified based on the facts - foreign relatives or other contacts, foreign financial interests, etc. These restrictions allow people to get cleared who wouldn’t. /1 thehill.com/homenews/admin…
Now, I do only see the ones that people want to fight, so it could be that there are some that are insufficiently related to facts & people for whatever reason decide not to challenge them.
/2
The clearance guidelines permit foreign contacts & interests to be used as factors to deny or restrict clearance. History & data shows that those factors can be/have been vulnerabilities to security. Ethnicity by itself is an irrelevant factor, however. /3
An interesting phenomenon I’ve noticed about covid. I’ve been looking at WaPo graphic every day. It reflects that there is a significant drop in daily cases & daily deaths every Sunday. Is this a reporting issue or a psychological phenomenon or both? (Pics to follow.)
/1
“we as former contestants feel th need to speak out against the messaging that these choices communicated — either intentionally or unintentionally — by the contestant Kelly Donohue and, implicitly by association, the producers of “Jeopardy!””
Could you be any more obnoxious?
“Kelly responded to a clue with a term for the Roma that is considered a slur. The use of this term doesn’t necessarily indicate malice . . . . Current diversity style guides, however, suggest that it not be used.”
Well good for the style guides! Fucking word police. 🙄
Giuliani case: unless the govt knows *significantly* different facts from what is being & has been historically reported about Giuliani’s dealings in Ukraine, I see little to no facts to support probable cause for a FARA violation & therefore to execute a search warrant. /1
This case looks extremely suspect to me. FARA is a technical statute aimed at specific conduct. It is seldom prosecuted criminally. DOJ has been trying to expand it in recent years, (not just against political figures) as Is typical of agencies looking to self-expand. /2
WaPo’s article about it today, e.g., was tellingly devoid of facts that would actually constitute a violation of the statute. It reads like it was somehow illegal to try to investigate the Ukraine/Biden/Burisma/Yovanovitch issues, which it wasn’t, under FARA or otherwise. /3
Gotta disagree. This is on all of us for tolerating bullshit “offenses” like this to stay on the books & on the stupid Supreme Court for authorizing police to detain & arrest people for non-incarcerable offenses such as this.
Fucking Mickey Mouse charges are the result of over-criminalization because a bunch of “Karens” write our laws & those laws do little beyond empowering bad cops to abuse their powers.
Exhibit A: I once drove 100 miles round trip on I-95 for 6 months straight with totally dead tags & a busted tail-light. Never got pulled over. Take a wild guess why. 🙄