5 ms·

Executives are also elected, and most states (all?) have provisions for extraordinary measures in extraordinary situations. Legislatures are able to override th

Executives are also elected, and most states (all?) have provisions for extraordinary measures in extraordinary situations. Legislatures are able to override them given sufficient super-majorities. Courts prevent executives from overstepping their authority.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>have provisions for extraordinary measures in extraordinary situations. And the legal justification by which those measures apply to a situation that is going on half a year is dubious at best. The legality of those measures themselves is also generally dubious from a constitutional law perspective. Most of them have never been meaningfully challenged because they've mostly been used for short term emergencies at this point. The legislatures need to nut up and to their damn jobs. They've had nearly 6mo at this point.
- organsnyder 6y ago
  And do what exactly after they "nut up"? Lockdowns and closures to contain the spread of the Covid-19 remain overwhelmingly popular in most areas, and are saving lives.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    Pass bills that says "yo, the governor is actually allowed to do <the current things they're doing> in response to a pandemic" with the usual legal stuff that is used to restrict it to the present situation. I know that doesn't solve the constitutional law aspect but frankly it won't matter for reasons of how the courts work.
caseysoftware 6y ago
> "extraordinary measures in extraordinary situations" That's a key phrase and begs some questions: - Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective? - Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective than doing nothing? - Has anyone announced what metrics we're even tracking to determine "effective"? - How long does something have to persist until it's no longer an "extraordinary situation"? - Are the "extraordinary measures" persistent or limited by time, risk, etc? Asking for the War on Poverty, Drugs, Terror, etc, etc.
- organsnyder 6y ago
  I'll answer the question for my state of Michigan, which is one with a governor facing partisan backlash over her decisions: > - Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective? That's how it's been handled here. We went through a phase of virtually absolute lockdown this spring, loosened restrictions this summer, and locked a few things back down again (bars were especially bad). The governor also ramped up mask mandates as we learned more about their effectiveness. > Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective than doing nothing? Not sure exactly what you mean here, but the regions that have done nothing have seen worse results. > Has anyone announced what metrics we're even tracking to determine "effective"? Number of confirmed cases, number of tests administered, percentage of tests being positive, number of deaths. The last metric is the one we really care about the most, but we can mitigate it by tracking leading indicators. Nothing more than statistical theory at play here. > How long does something have to persist until it's no longer an "extraordinary situation"? > Are the "extraordinary measures" persistent or limited by time, risk, etc? Michigan has a phased approach based on various metrics and indicators: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/whitmer/MI_SAFE_START_PLAN_689875_7.pdf https://www.michigan.gov/documents/whitmer/MI_SAFE_START_PLA... I would love to see this sort of prudence for other crises.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago

>have provisions for extraordinary measures in extraordinary situations. And the legal justification by which those measures apply to a situation that is going on half a year is dubious at best. The legality of those measures themselves is also generally dubious from a constitutional law perspective. Most of them have never been meaningfully challenged because they've mostly been used for short term emergencies at this point. The legislatures need to nut up and to their damn jobs. They've had nearly 6mo at this point.

organsnyder 6y ago
And do what exactly after they "nut up"? Lockdowns and closures to contain the spread of the Covid-19 remain overwhelmingly popular in most areas, and are saving lives.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Pass bills that says "yo, the governor is actually allowed to do <the current things they're doing> in response to a pandemic" with the usual legal stuff that is used to restrict it to the present situation. I know that doesn't solve the constitutional law aspect but frankly it won't matter for reasons of how the courts work.

caseysoftware 6y ago

> "extraordinary measures in extraordinary situations" That's a key phrase and begs some questions: - Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective? - Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective than doing nothing? - Has anyone announced what metrics we're even tracking to determine "effective"? - How long does something have to persist until it's no longer an "extraordinary situation"? - Are the "extraordinary measures" persistent or limited by time, risk, etc? Asking for the War on Poverty, Drugs, Terror, etc, etc.

organsnyder 6y ago
I'll answer the question for my state of Michigan, which is one with a governor facing partisan backlash over her decisions: > - Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective? That's how it's been handled here. We went through a phase of virtually absolute lockdown this spring, loosened restrictions this summer, and locked a few things back down again (bars were especially bad). The governor also ramped up mask mandates as we learned more about their effectiveness. > Do the "extraordinary measures" have to be proven effective than doing nothing? Not sure exactly what you mean here, but the regions that have done nothing have seen worse results. > Has anyone announced what metrics we're even tracking to determine "effective"? Number of confirmed cases, number of tests administered, percentage of tests being positive, number of deaths. The last metric is the one we really care about the most, but we can mitigate it by tracking leading indicators. Nothing more than statistical theory at play here. > How long does something have to persist until it's no longer an "extraordinary situation"? > Are the "extraordinary measures" persistent or limited by time, risk, etc? Michigan has a phased approach based on various metrics and indicators: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/whitmer/MI_SAFE_START_PLAN_689875_7.pdf https://www.michigan.gov/documents/whitmer/MI_SAFE_START_PLA... I would love to see this sort of prudence for other crises.