4 ms·
Even if people meet socially outside of work, they still aren't _required_ to go to work. Which means a lot of people can practice social distancing. People are
by citilife 7y ago
Even if people meet socially outside of work, they still aren't _required_ to go to work. Which means a lot of people can practice social distancing. People are scared, many will avoid groups (others may throw parties, but can't help that).
I know in my neighborhood, everyone is outside but we are all maintaining 2 meter distance. Some neighbors even brought up their grills and stayed seperate but can talk (at a distance).
- lm28469 7y ago> but can't help that They're fining (~$140) and detaining people who don't follow the rules in France. https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lepoint.fr%2Fsociete%2Fconfinement-premieres-garde-a-vue-pour-mise-en-danger-de-la-vie-d-autrui-20-03-2020-2368043_23.php https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3...
- whateveracct 7y agoDoing that in the US is a Supreme Court case waiting to happen.
- vel0city 7y agoStates have pretty broad police powers especially in times of crisis. It wouldn't surprise me to see the 10th Amendment apply to the state action of enforcing massive quarantines.
- whateveracct 7y agoWhile that's definitely true, this is also inherently running up agains the Bill of Rights. Police powers are not unbounded so as this continues (and especially as it subsides), I expect legitimate unanswered questions of Constitutionality could come into play.
- lm28469 7y agoMaybe, let's see how it works out. I have no skin in this game. Numbers will talk in the next weeks and months, in the meantime all I can say is that I'm glad I'm not in the US right now.
- volkl48 7y agoThe Supreme Court (and other courts) have held mandatory quarantines to be legal, including of entire areas and not just persons known to be infected. It would logically follow that if the quarantine is legal, penalties for violating it are also legal. --------------- Most of those cases are quite old, but they're still the ruling precedent on the topic as far as my (limited) knowledge goes. For one that went to the Supreme Court in 1902 and continues to be cited: Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana Board of Health https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compagnie_Francaise_de_Navigation_a_Vapeur_v._Louisiana_Board_of_Health https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compagnie_Francaise_de_Navigat...
- ryandrake 7y agoIf enforcement action happens now, we'll still have a functional Supreme Court around in a year in order to debate it.
- CydeWeys 7y agoDoubt it, and in any case, that would be years down the line. It wouldn't help you one whit if you've got police ordering you back into your house now. Which might be reasonable if there are flagrant violators and things continue to get worse.
- misiti3780 7y agoPeople are still having 200+ person weddings in Williamsburg as of this week. Absolutely crazy to me as a resident of the neighborhood: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/nyregion/Coronavirus-brooklyn-hasidic-jews.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/nyregion/Coronavirus-broo... "Concern over the spread of coronavirus in Hasidic communities had already been raised by a series of large weddings held this week. On Tuesday, the Fire Department broke up one wedding celebration in Williamsburg that had more than 200 guests."