And another one gone, and another one gone...

[mightymoose]

Very slowly these issues are making their way through. Surely there will be more to come.

Michigan court strikes down governor's emergency Covid powers - CNNPolitics

 

[army judge]

Very slowly these issues are making their way through. Surely there will be more to come.

Michigan court strikes down governor's emergency Covid powers - CNNPolitics

I told everyone, and I'll keep on telling anyone, that NO government official has the power or authority to require any person to imitate "Jessie James".

If that were so, these same official could mandate that you wear the government approved uniform, drive the government approved automobile, or recite the pledge of fealty to some "gubmint potentate".

This has been one huge overreach, and the building blocks will continue to be destroyed.

 

[Tax Counsel]

This has been one huge overreach, and the building blocks will continue to be destroyed.

I disagree. While some of the covid actions taken by what you call the "gubmit" have crossed the line to being unconstitutional not all of it has been "one huge overreach". But the great thing about our system is that where the line may be drawn will eventually be sorted out by the legislatures and the courts. And I put them in that order for a reason.

 

[army judge]

I disagree. While some of the covid actions taken by what you call the "gubmit" have crossed the line to being unconstitutional not all of it has been "one huge overreach". But the great thing about our system is that where the line may be drawn will eventually be sorted out by the legislatures and the courts. And I put them in that order for a reason.

You are free to disagree all you wish.

I don't use the word "gubmit", I mock some racist former donkey senators by using "gubmint", just as they did when they were advocated denying "equal rights and treatment" to citizens ONLY because they possessed melanin in their skin.

We aren't living in a dictatorship yet.

We live by a constitution, not to please a potentate.

Bottom line, these bizarre measures will be overturned.

History will look back on this time and ask, "What made them do it?"

Our government has overreacted and overreached.

 

[adjusterjack]

Our government has overreacted and overreached.

I don't think so.

The Michigan decision appears to be nothing more than political one upmanship. Whitmer is a Democrat. The Michigan Supreme Court and Legislature are both Republican controlled. Do the math.

We aren't living in a dictatorship yet.

I don't equate severe emergency measures as totalitarianism.

Sure, maybe Governors and Mayors erred on the side of caution. Who knows how much worse this plague could be without those "errors."

 

[army judge]

The Michigan decision appears to be nothing more than political one upmanship. Whitmer is a Democrat. The Michigan Supreme Court and Legislature are both Republican controlled. Do the math.

I did the math.
It appears you failed to do what you suggest others do.
Chief Justice Roberts chided us all when he said, "Justices are neither Republican or democrat."

He was praised for saying those words.
Now the opposite words are being brayed.
When President Trump dared bray the opposite, the chiding began.

However, I respect your right to an opinion, even though you disrespect and admonish me for mine.

If you disagree with my opinion, why not post yours?

 

[army judge]

I don't equate severe emergency measures as totalitarianism. One has to be an idiot to make that kind of comparison.

I'm NOT an idiot.

I've never once in all these years called you a name.

I've certainly never said or typed that you were an idiot.

Do you even KNOW the meaning of the word IDIOT?

I don't know why you'd resort to name calling?

No one wins anything on this site.

If I am an idiot, wouldn't others note my idiocy and ignore my ramblings anyway?

I don't understand why people fear words or opinions.

I hold many opinions, but don't post in an attempt to get others to agree with me.

I post to express my opinions.

The world in which we now live has suddenly become more bizarre, as IT appears to have infected the elderly among us, too.

Mere words appear to excite people so much these days, especially words with which they disagree.

My beloved mother once told me, "Son, don't allow words to anger you. If you disagree with someone's opinion to the point that you think you need to argue, smile and walk away. There are no opinion police, we all enjoy the right to hold our own opinions."

 

[adjusterjack]

I'm NOT an idiot.

I've never once in all these years called you a name.

I've certainly never said or typed that you were an idiot.

Crossed the line. Apologies.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I disagree. While some of the covid actions taken by what you call the "gubmit" have crossed the line to being unconstitutional not all of it has been "one huge overreach". But the great thing about our system is that where the line may be drawn will eventually be sorted out by the legislatures and the courts. And I put them in that order for a reason.

The problem is the legislatures can.t make something legal retroactively. The governors have taken actions that have cost citizens billions if not trillions of dollars and the total isn't yet in.

Just because it was may or may not have been the best thing for public health doesn't make it legal. If a government can do whatever it thinks is best for the public what are you going to do when a government decides it will be best for the people if they didn't hear bad news from the press or decide that a group of people are the reasons for problems in a country and they should all be shot Monday morning?

 

[Tax Counsel]

The problem is the legislatures can.t make something legal retroactively.

Actually, the legislature can do that. What the legislature cannot do is retroactively make something illegal, i.e. the constitution prohibits ex post facto criminal laws.

And my point is that, contrary to Army Judge's earlier implication, not all that the"gubmit" has done violates the constitution or otherwise does not conform to the applicable state law. Where the restrictions the government has imposed are legal the government may enforce them. As much as some people (I think you included) would grouse about even the legal steps taken to protect the public, the government can do that and I would argue has a responsibility to protect public health.

 

[Tax Counsel]

History will look back on this time and ask, "What made them do it?"

Given that the US has done considerably worse in managing the covid situation than most other nations, suffering deaths that would not have occurred with a more coordinated approach, I think in the future people will look back and say
"Why didn't they do more?"

 

[army judge]

I think in the future people will look back and say
"Why didn't they do more?"

As with most predictions, I doubt I'll be alive when history judges us.

I suspect those who come after us will laugh at many of the "protections" deployed.

Few will laugh at the suffering, deaths, and financial destruction wreaked by those who claim to have lead or instigated the protections.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Actually, the legislature can do that. What the legislature cannot do is retroactively make something illegal, i.e. the constitution prohibits ex post facto criminal laws.

So you are saying that government agents could say, kneel on the neck of a person in custody until he dies on May 25th of 2020, and then on say October 4th of 2020 pass a law that it is OK to kneel on a person's neck until you kill them and all would be good?

Do you have one example of such an ex post facto law ever being passed and used to remove civil liability?

The MI SC has ruled that the governor took actions that were outside the law. The state should have to pay for any damages such acts caused.

 

[army judge]

The state should have to pay for any damages such acts caused.

That, my friend, is BUT one of the fears these "power snatchers" fear!

 

[Tax Counsel]

So you are saying that government agents could say, kneel on the neck of a person in custody until he dies on May 25th of 2020, and then on say October 4th of 2020 pass a law that it is OK to kneel on a person's neck until you kill them and all would be good?

The legislature could indeed remove that as being a crime and do that retroactively, subject to the wrath of the voters. Nothing in the federal constitution nor the constitution of any state prohibits that. After all, if we no longer think any one should be prosecuted for it going forward, what is our reason for wanting to prosecute for it for past actions? In some cases there will be a good argument for doing it, in others, there won't be. That's for the legislature to decide.

Do you have one example of such an ex post facto law ever being passed and used to remove civil liability?

The Constitution does not address ex post facto civil laws. The Supreme Court has held that the prohibition on ex post facto laws is criminal only. And even then, ex post facto laws are those that when passed would enable the government to prosecute a crime for an act that was legal at the time it was done. The reason for this prohibition should be obvious. It is unfair to prosecute and punish someone for an act that was legal when he did it. He had no way to know at the time that he might later be punished by the state for it and thus could not have conformed his actions to meet the later law.

The MI SC has ruled that the governor took actions that were outside the law. The state should have to pay for any damages such acts caused.

Whether the state may retroactively absolve itself of liability for its own acts is another matter and would be an issue of interpretation of the relevant state Constitution. The state cannot by itself, of course, cure any violations of the federal constitution.

Again, my point here is that not everything the states have done violates the law despite the screams of some who think everything the state has done with respect to corona virus is illegal. You seem to be among those in that camp. I don't share that view. To the extent that a state has actually violated the law, it can be challenged on that. But not all that's been done falls into that category.

 

[Tax Counsel]

As with most predictions, I doubt I'll be alive when history judges us.

I suspect those who come after us will laugh at many of the "protections" deployed.

Few will laugh at the suffering, deaths, and financial destruction wreaked by those who claim to have lead or instigated the protections.

You and I have very different view of what those in the future may think. Perhaps neither of us will turn out correct. Neither of us will be around in a century to see how future generations look at this event. I'm pretty sure few will laugh at the many deaths to the virus and I think many of them will wonder why we didn't do a better job at containing the spread of the virus, like some other nations did.

 

[welkin]

Given that the US has done considerably worse in managing the covid situation than most other nations, suffering deaths that would not have occurred with a more coordinated approach, I think in the future people will look back and say
"Why didn't they do more?"

I would be interested in knowing what more you think should have been done. Fake news aside.

 

[army judge]

Vere are your papers?
The insanity won't die, but it could kill you?

WINTER SPRINGS, Fla - The lawyer for the family of a 16-year-old boy who was arrested last month after refusing to wear a mask at a central Florida high school called the incident "government abuse" of a teen suffering from panic attacks.

The Winter Springs High School sophomore, whose name was redacted on the Sept. 17 report, was arrested after refusing to wear a mask and abide by other school rules, which violated a probation order that required him to maintain good behavior in school, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

Jose Rivas, the family's attorney, said the teenager's prior record didn't justify what he viewed as an uncalled-for action.

"Should they be arresting a 16-year-old child knowing he already has a medical condition?" he said.

In a statement, Rivas' law firm called the arrest "government abuse" and added, "We will be seeking just and fair compensation for the illegal arrest ... and the harm that this action caused him."

The boy's mother told the newspaper her son has an anxiety disorder. She said he was arrested after going to the school office to ask for water because he was feeling panicky and was having trouble breathing in the mask.

"I couldn't grasp it at first. Because of a mask?" the newspaper quoted the mother as saying. "I was just in a disbelief." The Associated Press isn't identifying the mother to protect the student's identity.

A report from the Seminole County Sheriff's Office states that the boy had been instructed to obey school rules as a condition of his probation. It did not say what he was on probation for. The report said that starting on Sept. 1 he refused to obey rules, including wearing a mask and social distancing, and that he received a warning. The report said he also was caught vaping in the cafeteria.

On Sept. 17, he was seen again not wearing a mask and refused to put one on. A deputy then arrested him and brought him to a juvenile detention center. The sheriff's office told the newspaper the arrest was for probation violations, not violations of the school district's mask rules.

By not wearing a mask, however, he was in violation of school rules. Masks are a requirement for students and staff on all Seminole County public school campuses during the coronavirus pandemic.

School Resource Deputy Adrian Richardson warned the teen that getting in trouble at school was a violation of his probation, the report said.

The student has not returned to the school. His mother said the family is moving and that he will complete an online education program.

"He just feels like they will target him again," she said. "It's really taken a toll on him."



Florida teen arrested at school after refusing to wear mask

 

[Zigner]

That story was sugar-coated just a bit. An alternative way to say it is that the bias-blast from that story hurt my eyes.

 

[army judge]

That story was sugar-coated just a bit. An alternative way to say it is that the bias-blast from that story hurt my eyes.

Perhaps you could use TWO of those great masks.

One over your nose and mouth, the other over your curious eyes.

A set of earplugs to protect your hearing, and you're safe from things that plague the planet.

Safety first, mate, safety first.