3 ms·

States should close their borders.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ng12 7y ago
I hate to say it but I agree. RI had the right idea. NYC is a mess right now: we are still not taking this seriously. Trains are crowded, grocery stores are crowded, the Staten Island ferry is crowded, parks are crowded. In an especially hilarious twist people were crowding the piers yesterday to watch the USNS Comfort come in. We need drastic action.
- runawaybottle 7y ago
  If we learned one thing with this Pandemic, it’s that basically whatever is at the edge of your mind needs to happen right away. If you think we need to close state borders, then we probably needed to have done it 2 weeks ago, let alone right now. If you think $1200 is not enough, we probably need a bill on the floor right away for another month of stimulus. Whatever even pops into our head is already 2 weeks behind.
  - macintux 7y ago
    I don't recall where I saw the reference, so I can't find the link, but some notable pointed out on Twitter a few weeks ago that with exponential growth rates the time for action is when it feels too early.
    - JamesBarney 7y ago
      That was Paul Graham https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1237801364023017472?lang=en https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1237801364023017472?...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- elliekelly 7y ago
  I don't think it's something that could really be done in the US. We have a constitutional right to move freely between and among the states.
  - HarryHirsch 7y ago
    That's theory colliding with practice. In theory we can't and the Republican originalists in the rural states would agree because it suits their wordview, but in practice we must because nothing else will save the urban coastal states where the Democratic "living constitution" folks live.
  - macintux 7y ago
    You'd have to go to the courts to get a transportation ban overthrown, and they'd be reluctant to intervene. By the time you were successful, the crisis would (please, hopefully) be over.
    - JamesBarney 7y ago
      Getting 5 people on the Supreme Court to say "no let the pandemic run its course, even if it costs 10s or 100s of thousands of deaths" would be difficult.
  - JamesBarney 7y ago
    Can you quote any practicing constitutional lawyers who believe the courts will stop the federal government from restricting cross state movement during the worst pandemic of our lifetime? Everyone I've read has basically said as long as it's necessary and temporary in a time of emergency it will fly.
  - jmalicki 7y ago
    According to this take it is well-settled law from previous epidemics that this is constitutional. "In 1824, the Supreme Court in Gibbons v. Ogden alluded to a state’s authority to quarantine under the police powers. In 1902, the Court directly addressed a state’s power to quarantine an entire geographic area in Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health, where both the law and its implementation were upheld as valid exercises of the state’s police power. A shipping company in this case challenged an interpretation of a state statute that conferred upon the state board of health the authority to exclude healthy persons, whether they came from without or within the state, from a geographic area infested with a disease. The shipping company alleged that the statute as interpreted interfered with interstate commerce, and thus was an unconstitutional violation of the Commerce Clause. The Court rejected this argument, holding that although the statute may have had an effect on commerce, it was not unconstitutional. In a subsequent case, the Court made clear that at least where Congress has not taken action, it is “well settled” that states may impose quarantines to prevent the spread of disease even though quarantines “affect interstate commerce." Pages 8-9 of "Federal and State Quarantine and Isolation Authority" by the Congressional Research Service (2014) https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33201.pdf https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33201.pdf
- mancerayder 7y ago
  It really goes to show how deadly entitled individual rights can be. People in the US and in NYC in this case, whether Right-wing or Left-wing, justify going out, crowding and being selfish on the ground of their individual rights. The ACLU is challenging anti-congregation orders and there are still Trump people who refuse to comply on similar grounds. It's not even political - Americans wish to die for their freedoms. In some European countries drones are flying around threatening fines and jail time for being out for non-essential reasons. The individualism versus communitarian debate is in full swing, and Nature chose communitarianism.
- a_tractor 7y ago
  The people going to the parks and crowding the piers obviously disagree. What gives you the right to tell them what to do? Their body, their choice, no?
jmull 7y ago
State isn't really best level of granularity. States do provide clear lines of demarcation, which allows for good enforcement, but closing, say, CA as a whole doesn't do much. You'd really want to go as granular as possible, which is what these stay-at-home orders are about.
leggomylibro 7y ago
That defeats the purpose of this being a single United nation. Do you really think it would be healthy to artificially accelerate the rapid fracture of our collective unity? E pluribus unum. We stand together, or we fall apart. At least, figuratively...it's probably not a good idea to stand too close together at the moment.
danans 7y ago
There are cases in places as remote as central Alaska at the moment. The virus is everywhere, and continuing business-as-usual anywhere is the problem (i.e much of the South and central US), because each state not sheltering in place has its own huge internal transmission vectors.
ptrhvns 7y ago
IANAL, but AFAIK, that would be a violation of the Constitution for the United States. In fact, I think Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York threatened to sue another governor (was it Rhode Island, Vermont, somewhere else?) for attempting to close their borders to cars with NY license plates.
syntheticnature 7y ago
With what manpower? States are not set up to have borders closed, there are hundreds if not thousands of small roads to handle, and cases where entire cities straddle land borders. Plus all the essential aspects are wide-ranging. Interstate goods transport still needs to occur. I know someone who works an essential job in sewer treatment across a state border. What sort of paperwork would he need to go back and forth for that, and what sort of commute time issues would be inflicted with a checkpoint and/or need to re-route past blocked routes?
- runawaybottle 7y ago
  I’d make things even simpler. If you don’t have a long haul truck, you’re not moving between states. For essential work, I have no answer.
standardUser 7y ago
First, let's get every state to order a lockdown and restrict all unnecessary movement and congregation. We aren't even there yet. If people have cause to cross state lines (some people live right on state borders, for example) they should be able to. If people need to travel to a relative, they should be able to. Remember, we are not trying to kill off the virus with social distancing. We are only trying to dramatically slow the transmission rate. We are succeeding in places that have reasonable shelter at home orders. We need to expand these types of orders to the entire country. Then, closed borders should not be necessary.
icedchai 7y ago
Logistically it's almost impossible. you know how many side roads there are between NY, NJ, PA, CT, VT, Mass, etc? Tons! What we need is a national quarantine. The President needs to go on the air, tell people he was wrong, the situation is more serious than he thought, and we need to stay home for at least the next 4 weeks, until further notice. That will never happen though.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

ng12 7y ago

I hate to say it but I agree. RI had the right idea. NYC is a mess right now: we are still not taking this seriously. Trains are crowded, grocery stores are crowded, the Staten Island ferry is crowded, parks are crowded. In an especially hilarious twist people were crowding the piers yesterday to watch the USNS Comfort come in. We need drastic action.

runawaybottle 7y ago
If we learned one thing with this Pandemic, it’s that basically whatever is at the edge of your mind needs to happen right away. If you think we need to close state borders, then we probably needed to have done it 2 weeks ago, let alone right now. If you think $1200 is not enough, we probably need a bill on the floor right away for another month of stimulus. Whatever even pops into our head is already 2 weeks behind.
- macintux 7y ago
  I don't recall where I saw the reference, so I can't find the link, but some notable pointed out on Twitter a few weeks ago that with exponential growth rates the time for action is when it feels too early.
  - JamesBarney 7y ago
    That was Paul Graham https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1237801364023017472?lang=en https://mobile.twitter.com/paulg/status/1237801364023017472?...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
elliekelly 7y ago
I don't think it's something that could really be done in the US. We have a constitutional right to move freely between and among the states.
- HarryHirsch 7y ago
  That's theory colliding with practice. In theory we can't and the Republican originalists in the rural states would agree because it suits their wordview, but in practice we must because nothing else will save the urban coastal states where the Democratic "living constitution" folks live.
- macintux 7y ago
  You'd have to go to the courts to get a transportation ban overthrown, and they'd be reluctant to intervene. By the time you were successful, the crisis would (please, hopefully) be over.
  - JamesBarney 7y ago
    Getting 5 people on the Supreme Court to say "no let the pandemic run its course, even if it costs 10s or 100s of thousands of deaths" would be difficult.
- JamesBarney 7y ago
  Can you quote any practicing constitutional lawyers who believe the courts will stop the federal government from restricting cross state movement during the worst pandemic of our lifetime? Everyone I've read has basically said as long as it's necessary and temporary in a time of emergency it will fly.
- jmalicki 7y ago
  According to this take it is well-settled law from previous epidemics that this is constitutional. "In 1824, the Supreme Court in Gibbons v. Ogden alluded to a state’s authority to quarantine under the police powers. In 1902, the Court directly addressed a state’s power to quarantine an entire geographic area in Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health, where both the law and its implementation were upheld as valid exercises of the state’s police power. A shipping company in this case challenged an interpretation of a state statute that conferred upon the state board of health the authority to exclude healthy persons, whether they came from without or within the state, from a geographic area infested with a disease. The shipping company alleged that the statute as interpreted interfered with interstate commerce, and thus was an unconstitutional violation of the Commerce Clause. The Court rejected this argument, holding that although the statute may have had an effect on commerce, it was not unconstitutional. In a subsequent case, the Court made clear that at least where Congress has not taken action, it is “well settled” that states may impose quarantines to prevent the spread of disease even though quarantines “affect interstate commerce." Pages 8-9 of "Federal and State Quarantine and Isolation Authority" by the Congressional Research Service (2014) https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33201.pdf https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33201.pdf
mancerayder 7y ago
It really goes to show how deadly entitled individual rights can be. People in the US and in NYC in this case, whether Right-wing or Left-wing, justify going out, crowding and being selfish on the ground of their individual rights. The ACLU is challenging anti-congregation orders and there are still Trump people who refuse to comply on similar grounds. It's not even political - Americans wish to die for their freedoms. In some European countries drones are flying around threatening fines and jail time for being out for non-essential reasons. The individualism versus communitarian debate is in full swing, and Nature chose communitarianism.
a_tractor 7y ago
The people going to the parks and crowding the piers obviously disagree. What gives you the right to tell them what to do? Their body, their choice, no?

jmull 7y ago

State isn't really best level of granularity. States do provide clear lines of demarcation, which allows for good enforcement, but closing, say, CA as a whole doesn't do much. You'd really want to go as granular as possible, which is what these stay-at-home orders are about.

leggomylibro 7y ago

That defeats the purpose of this being a single United nation. Do you really think it would be healthy to artificially accelerate the rapid fracture of our collective unity? E pluribus unum. We stand together, or we fall apart. At least, figuratively...it's probably not a good idea to stand too close together at the moment.

danans 7y ago

There are cases in places as remote as central Alaska at the moment. The virus is everywhere, and continuing business-as-usual anywhere is the problem (i.e much of the South and central US), because each state not sheltering in place has its own huge internal transmission vectors.

ptrhvns 7y ago

IANAL, but AFAIK, that would be a violation of the Constitution for the United States. In fact, I think Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York threatened to sue another governor (was it Rhode Island, Vermont, somewhere else?) for attempting to close their borders to cars with NY license plates.

syntheticnature 7y ago

With what manpower? States are not set up to have borders closed, there are hundreds if not thousands of small roads to handle, and cases where entire cities straddle land borders. Plus all the essential aspects are wide-ranging. Interstate goods transport still needs to occur. I know someone who works an essential job in sewer treatment across a state border. What sort of paperwork would he need to go back and forth for that, and what sort of commute time issues would be inflicted with a checkpoint and/or need to re-route past blocked routes?

runawaybottle 7y ago
I’d make things even simpler. If you don’t have a long haul truck, you’re not moving between states. For essential work, I have no answer.

standardUser 7y ago

First, let's get every state to order a lockdown and restrict all unnecessary movement and congregation. We aren't even there yet. If people have cause to cross state lines (some people live right on state borders, for example) they should be able to. If people need to travel to a relative, they should be able to. Remember, we are not trying to kill off the virus with social distancing. We are only trying to dramatically slow the transmission rate. We are succeeding in places that have reasonable shelter at home orders. We need to expand these types of orders to the entire country. Then, closed borders should not be necessary.

icedchai 7y ago

Logistically it's almost impossible. you know how many side roads there are between NY, NJ, PA, CT, VT, Mass, etc? Tons! What we need is a national quarantine. The President needs to go on the air, tell people he was wrong, the situation is more serious than he thought, and we need to stay home for at least the next 4 weeks, until further notice. That will never happen though.