5 ms·
The illegal act is arbitrarily shutting down the ability to earn a livelihood. When these cases make their way through the courts I’m thinking they’re going to
by koolba 6y ago
The illegal act is arbitrarily shutting down the ability to earn a livelihood. When these cases make their way through the courts I’m thinking they’re going to side with the Musks, not the Newsoms.
- Nightshaxx 6y agoWhy shut down jobs if they can be safely done with social distancing? Preventing someone from being to exercise their freedoms and feed their family when they aren't harming others is just illogical panic.
- new_realist 6y agoThe factory was scheduled to reopen in a week, but Elon had to start earlier, before negotiations had completed. I suspect there was a requirement or two by the county he didn’t like.
- galvin 6y agoNobody is arguing against feeding families. Business taking insufficient safety measures pose a risk to their employees and the wider community. Due to the broad and delayed nature of the risk and the effort required to deal with it, it's not clear that business will voluntarily take the best course of action. For the sake of protecting employees from unsafe conditions and protecting the wider community from secondary effects in a timely manner it's better to implement broad measures first and deal with the details later. The cost of temporary unemployment is nothing compared to the cost of surpassing the capacity of healthcare services.
- new_realist 6y agoCalifornia unemployment benefits are generous; in fact, likely more generous than wages from risking your family’s health on the factory floor.
- TylerE 6y agoI would hardly call it an arbitrary shutdown. Pandemic, ya know.
- dgzl 6y agoConstitutional rights, ya know.
- throwaway45783 6y agoIs this a constitutional right, or just a matter of general individual liberty? Because if it's a matter of individual liberty, I think we can sacrifice some of those for the time being for the greater good of society.
- dgzl 6y agoI would say locking down the country violates our rights to liberty and also the pursuit of happiness.
- TylerE 6y agoBeing dead violates our right to life.
- dgzl 6y agoWhat a ridiculous statement. You cannot enforce the Constitution on edit: acts of nature.
- galvin 6y agoExaggerated maybe but not ridiculous. A persons right to pursue happiness does not trump other people's rights to do the same. Willing spreading an infectious virus is not an act of nature.
- 6y ago
- sandworm101 6y ago>> The illegal act is arbitrarily shutting down the ability to earn a livelihood. That would be illegal, but isn't what is happening. An outright ban on all work would certainly be unconstitutional (life liberty, pursuit of happiness etc). But temporarily shutting down a business because of a virus, safety issues, lack of insurance, pollution worries, failure to pay taxes, inadequate lighting in the parking lots, to preserve a crime scene, or because the road out front needs work ... local governments close businesses all the time. So long as the reason is reasonable and the shutdown is temporary the courts will find it acceptable. If you want to win in court, disobeying a law is generally not the best path. Musk isn't Rosa Parks. Musk doesn't have to be arrested before he can challenge the law in court. By acting like this he isn't helping his case(s). I'm sure his lawyers are pulling their hair out. Politically, Musk is shooting himself in the foot. What if the local health department says that automotive factory workers must stay 10feet away from each other, all get respirators, get tested twice a day, and must take a month of covid safety training? Those will all be "reasonable" in the eyes of any court. That they would also kill any chance of Tesla turning a profit is political consequence of disobeying previous health orders.
- metacritic12 6y agoIt's uncertain whether the CA laws / orders are themselves illegal or unconstitutional. In an emergency setting like this, you have both new "rules" that are illegal, and some legal rules that are just being violated without prosecution.
- koolba 6y ago> If you want to win in court, disobeying a law is generally not the best path. Musk isn't Rosa Parks. Musk doesn't have to be arrested before he can challenge the law in court. By acting like this he isn't helping his case(s). Justice delayed is justice denied. When the courts themselves are grinding to a halt with the lockdown who knows when injunctive relief would arrive? > I'm sure his lawyers are pulling their hair out. Ha! With the rest of his shenanigans I’d be impressed if they have any left. The “pedo guy” episode must have caused a few Rogaine scrips. > Politically, Musk is shooting himself in the foot. What if the local health department says that automotive factory workers must stay 10feet away from each other, all get respirators, get tested twice a day, and must take a month of covid safety training? Those will all be "reasonable" in the eyes of any court. That they would also kill any chance of Tesla turning a profit is political consequence of disobeying previous health orders. If they target specifically Tesla with rules like that it’d be thrown out for being vindictive and targeted. If they try to impose those type of rules on the entire State they’ll have a class action of businesses challenging them. If rules are going to be imposed they need to be debated on facts, written by a legislative body, and signed into law. Not shot from the hip on a daily basis on the current executive’s whims.