PDA

View Full Version : Trump Can’t Reopen the Country Over State Objections




TheCount
03-28-2020, 12:29 PM
...

A triad of bedrock constitutional principles gives the states the upper hand. First, the Constitution and cases dating back to the founding era make clear that the power to make decisions about public health and welfare—for example, whether to close businesses and schools—lies primarily with the states, not the federal government. Second, to the extent that the federal government does have power in these areas, that power lies with Congress, not the president. Third, federal powers, even when wielded by Congress, are limited. And, as a practical matter, Congress is extremely unlikely to use its power to force states to roll back public health measures, even if it could do so as a formal legal matter. Under these principles, Trump lacks the legal authority to override orders from governors and other state and local officials that are designed to protect the public health and welfare of their citizens.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/trump-cant-reopen-country-over-state-objections

Gumba of Liberty
03-28-2020, 12:34 PM
https://www.lawfareblog.com/trump-cant-reopen-country-over-state-objections

Disagree. After the Civil War, codified with the 14th Amendment, large swaths of the Bill of Rights was imposed on (aka incorporated into) the States. States cannot violate the Bill of Rights. If they do, the Feds can step in and restore Constitutional Protections.

dannno
03-28-2020, 12:59 PM
Trump has been saying this all along, I guess you don't listen to his daily briefings.

He shut the country down, many parts of the country that don't want to be shut down because they aren't experiencing any serious problems.

Those parts can be opened up when Trump open's the country back up.

The places that have worse problems, the governors will decide when they open back up. That is what TRUMP HIMSELF says.

So I'm not really sure what the point of this thread is, except that it exposes you don't even know what Trump says on the matter and whether you disagree with him. Worse, the people who wrote that article at lawfareblog obviously aren't paying attention either.

I've found lawfareblog to be a pretty shitty website overall.