Thanks for the clarification. I'm left confused about why this is happening then. It seems well designed to not allow for the situation we see described here,

Thanks for the clarification. I'm left confused about why this is happening then. It seems well designed to not allow for the situation we see described here, yet this situation is happening and similar situations are referenced. That leads me to believe one or more of: a) the case cited here has more extenuating circumstances that are not being reported, which I see as likely as articles have a point of view to express and I'm willing to believe the author may leave out information they deem not contributing to that point (whether through malice or incompetence) b) there are additional laws at the state or local level which are less lenient c) there are other parts of this law or other Federal laws which interact in a way limiting or making ambiguous portions of this law d) there is specific case law that severely limits how these escape valves are used in practice I have no idea how any of these apply, if any do, but it's odd that there are specific allowances for businesses to no be forced to shut down, yet, we have examples of exactly that.