3 ms·

>The federal government never put it there, Maybe you could debate when the federal government put it there, but they did. I think we would both agree that at

>The federal government never put it there, Maybe you could debate when the federal government put it there, but they did. I think we would both agree that at all phases of a quarantine the Federal Government has supremacy over the States. Further, Federal government deferring to the State on closures is unrelated to their deferment on opening (legally anyway, the political reasons are likely the same)...In other words just because the federal government deferred to States on closing, doesn't mean they couldn't jump in at any time. In fact with the openings they federal government implemented "Opening Up America Again" which is voluntary, but they could have just the same made it mandatory. Otherwise, You are highlighting many other failures, which I tend to agree with...which are likely part of the desire for the federal government to distance themselves from any fallout of bad outcomes from reopenings. And rest assured when a State opening outcome is good Trump will pat himself on the back and claim they closely followed "Opening Up America Again" guidelines/phases, and States with bad outcomes failed to follow the same.

dmwallin 6y ago
You are just wrong on this. The government of the United States is set up so states have supremacy over the Federal Government in many/most areas of domestic policy. I recommend reading up more on this. https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/no-trump-cant-force-states-to-reopen/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/no-trump-cant-force-s...
- throwaway_USD 6y ago
  > The government of the United States is set up so states have supremacy over the Federal Government in many/most areas of domestic policy. I don't think you are familiar with the commerce clause [1]. It gives the federal government control to regulate anything that would effect interstate commerce which would obviously include spread of a novel infectious virus. Obviously State issued mandatory lock-downs effect interstate commerce and that where there federal government can begin regulating. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause Edit: In 1902, the Supreme Court directly addressed a state’s power to quarantine an entire geographical area. In Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health, the justices upheld a Louisiana Supreme Court decision that the state could enact and enforce quarantine laws unless Congress had decided to preempt them.

dmwallin 6y ago

You are just wrong on this. The government of the United States is set up so states have supremacy over the Federal Government in many/most areas of domestic policy. I recommend reading up more on this. https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/no-trump-cant-force-states-to-reopen/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/no-trump-cant-force-s...

throwaway_USD 6y ago
> The government of the United States is set up so states have supremacy over the Federal Government in many/most areas of domestic policy. I don't think you are familiar with the commerce clause [1]. It gives the federal government control to regulate anything that would effect interstate commerce which would obviously include spread of a novel infectious virus. Obviously State issued mandatory lock-downs effect interstate commerce and that where there federal government can begin regulating. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause Edit: In 1902, the Supreme Court directly addressed a state’s power to quarantine an entire geographical area. In Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health, the justices upheld a Louisiana Supreme Court decision that the state could enact and enforce quarantine laws unless Congress had decided to preempt them.