3 ms·

Banning people from traveling, meeting each other, and working to earn a living and support themselves, are very much erosions of liberty, and people have been

Banning people from traveling, meeting each other, and working to earn a living and support themselves, are very much erosions of liberty, and people have been seriously impacted (particularly the poor). You are right, however, that they are not directly erosions of democracy. However, there are plenty of direct erosions of democracy, even here in the United States. Our democracy in the US is applied through the rule of law, and many mandates have been issued in a manner inconsistent with the law: arbitrary, capricious use of power not authorized by the law. This is why, for instance, a court struck down Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer's extended use of emergency powers.

maxerickson 6y ago
The court didn't find that Whitmer acted arbitrarily or capriciously, they simply ruled that she lacked the authority for the actions she took. (for instance, the first finding speaks of the initial 28 day declaration being within the authority of the governor) https://courts.michigan.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/Clerks/Recent%20Opinions/20-21%20Term%20Opinions/In%20re%20Certified%20Questions-OP.pdf https://courts.michigan.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/Cler... I'm being pedantic, but you are implying a narrative that doesn't exist.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > The court didn't find that Whitmer acted arbitrarily or capriciously, they simply ruled that she lacked the authority for the actions she took. Specifically, it found that that emergency powers act under which she acted was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority; the fundamental error the Court found was by the legislature, in not crafting an emergency powers law with sufficiently defined boundaries (or, alternatively, by not availing itself of the process to amend the Constitution to create broad emergency powers.)
- fennecfoxen 6y ago
  There have been many suits about many measures in the US. My selection of Whitmer was meant as a single illustrative example, and not necessarily meant to embody all possible civic vices; if you simply wish to clarify that Whitmer was not ruled "arbitrary and capricious" then that clarification provides people with additional factual information which is well and good. On the other hand, you can go next door to Ohio and find a ruling using that language in Rock House Fitness et al v. Amy Acton and Lake County General Health District. I decline to enumerate further suits at this time; I need to stop somewhere or I'll be here all day and it won't do anyone any good.

maxerickson 6y ago

The court didn't find that Whitmer acted arbitrarily or capriciously, they simply ruled that she lacked the authority for the actions she took. (for instance, the first finding speaks of the initial 28 day declaration being within the authority of the governor) https://courts.michigan.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/Clerks/Recent%20Opinions/20-21%20Term%20Opinions/In%20re%20Certified%20Questions-OP.pdf https://courts.michigan.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/Cler... I'm being pedantic, but you are implying a narrative that doesn't exist.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> The court didn't find that Whitmer acted arbitrarily or capriciously, they simply ruled that she lacked the authority for the actions she took. Specifically, it found that that emergency powers act under which she acted was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority; the fundamental error the Court found was by the legislature, in not crafting an emergency powers law with sufficiently defined boundaries (or, alternatively, by not availing itself of the process to amend the Constitution to create broad emergency powers.)
fennecfoxen 6y ago
There have been many suits about many measures in the US. My selection of Whitmer was meant as a single illustrative example, and not necessarily meant to embody all possible civic vices; if you simply wish to clarify that Whitmer was not ruled "arbitrary and capricious" then that clarification provides people with additional factual information which is well and good. On the other hand, you can go next door to Ohio and find a ruling using that language in Rock House Fitness et al v. Amy Acton and Lake County General Health District. I decline to enumerate further suits at this time; I need to stop somewhere or I'll be here all day and it won't do anyone any good.