4 ms·

It's worth noting that, practically speaking, none of the public health measures used in the recent pandemic have reached the level of what the ACLU was arguing

It's worth noting that, practically speaking, none of the public health measures used in the recent pandemic have reached the level of what the ACLU was arguing against, which was things like forced quarantine (e.g. you're infected with asymptomatic covid, so you're locked in a hospital ward and not allowed to leave). In that original article, the ACLU also mentions that individuals and community engagement are important in the initial article. 13 years later, it spoke out about states banning businesses from mandating vaccinations or masks to enter their place of business. It should absolutely be within my rights as a business owner to ban an unvaccinated or unmasked patron, and it is a violation of my civil liberties for the government to ban this. In other words, the 2008 and 2021 positions are entirely compatible.

throwoutway 5y ago
> It should absolutely be within my rights as a business owner to ban an unvaccinated or unmasked patron, and it is a violation of my civil liberties for the government to ban this. Maybe it was the way you worded this but it surprised me. I recall that civil liberties said that businesses can’t ban people for what they look like, or if they have a beard, or a religious symbol, etc. I don’t think that changes for Covid how is it a violation of your civil liberties? And then how is it not a violation of THEIR civil liberties? I’m vaxxed and masked, but I think the ACLU has lost their collective heads in many ways
- joshuamorton 5y ago
  > that civil liberties said that businesses can’t ban people for what they look like, This is wrong. One of these isn't like the other. I expect that whole race and religion are things the aclu would defend, having a beard is not (unless it is for a religious purpose). Freedom of association is a civil liberty, and you're correct that it doesn't change for covid, but it absolutely allows a business owner to kick people out for nearly any reason (race, religion, and gender being some of the few exceptions)
  - throwoutway 5y ago
    I noticed you didn't directly answer the questions.. but I'll ask something else I don't know if the courts have ruled on this before, but pre-covid, would you have considered a business owner kicking someone out for their health status or chicken pox vaccination status an acceptable practice? Or would you argue in the case of the patron?
    - joshuamorton 5y ago
      > I noticed you didn't directly answer the questions.. but I'll ask something else I thought I did. If I didn't, I apologize, but then I wasn't clear on what exacly you were asking. > but pre-covid, would you have considered a business owner kicking someone out for their health status or chicken pox vaccination status an acceptable practice? I'd think its weird, I might even argue that it was morally wrong to do so. But I would still argue that it was the business owners right.
josephcsible 5y ago
> It should absolutely be within my rights as a business owner to ban an unvaccinated or unmasked patron, and it is a violation of my civil liberties for the government to ban this. Do you think it's also within your rights as a business owner to allow unmasked and unvaccinated patrons, or to ban masks? If so, then are you upset that these civil liberties have been violated? If not, then why do you think the opposite is?
- joshuamorton 5y ago
  > Do you think it's also within your rights as a business owner to allow unmasked and unvaccinated patrons, or to ban masks? Yes > If so, then are you upset that these civil liberties have been violated? No, because on the balance there is a legitimate government interest in violating them, and there aren't any less-intrusive ways to accomplish the governments legitimate goals. In other words, I'm about as upset by this as by laws that prevent me from banning black people from my store.
s1artibartfast 5y ago
This is the article. It is clearly talking about top down state mandate compelling businesses, not allowing businesses to set their own policies. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/02/opinion/covid-vaccine-mandates-civil-liberties.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/02/opinion/covid-vaccine-man... Here is the ACLU statement in opposition the SCOTUS rulings that the new york ban on church gatherings was unconstitutional https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-comment-scotus-decision-religious-challenge-covid-19-restrictions https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-comment-scotus-deci... During the pandemic, there were many mandates that infringed personal liberty. For example, in CA the governor claimed to have the power to bar healthy people leaving their house and visiting the private homes of their lovers, friends, and family. If that's not a civil liberties issue, I don't know what is.
- joshuamorton 5y ago
  > Here is the ACLU statement in opposition the SCOTUS rulings that the new york ban on church gatherings was unconstitutional If I'm remembering correctly, the ACLU statement here is correct. Religious gatherings were given more leeway than other large gatherings. While obviously the 1a is important, I generally agree with the ACLU that the courts approach to religion is a bit ridiculous in terms of how much deference particularly Christianity gets. Ones religion shouldn't result in getting special treatment under the law, either bad or good. > example, in CA the governor claimed to have the power to bar healthy people leaving their house and visiting the private homes of their lovers, friends, and family. No he didn't. (Or at least not in any way that came with threat of government force. If I'm wrong here you should be able to find someone who faced a fine for having a party on their home).
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    You can read the Supreme Court ruling yourself. The court found that it was religious discrimination specifically because other types of activities and gatherings were permitted. Regarding the California mandate, this language is this certainly in the mandate (I believe December 2020) . Sheriff and counties were empowered and tasked with executing the mandates, and you are correct that they largely do not enforce this part. This does not change the fact that it was part of the executive action, in both language and intent. https://www.kake.com/story/41973801/from-a-25000-fine-to-a-warning-how-are-states-enforcing-the-coronavirus-stay-at-home-orders https://www.kake.com/story/41973801/from-a-25000-fine-to-a-w...

throwoutway 5y ago

> It should absolutely be within my rights as a business owner to ban an unvaccinated or unmasked patron, and it is a violation of my civil liberties for the government to ban this. Maybe it was the way you worded this but it surprised me. I recall that civil liberties said that businesses can’t ban people for what they look like, or if they have a beard, or a religious symbol, etc. I don’t think that changes for Covid how is it a violation of your civil liberties? And then how is it not a violation of THEIR civil liberties? I’m vaxxed and masked, but I think the ACLU has lost their collective heads in many ways

joshuamorton 5y ago
> that civil liberties said that businesses can’t ban people for what they look like, This is wrong. One of these isn't like the other. I expect that whole race and religion are things the aclu would defend, having a beard is not (unless it is for a religious purpose). Freedom of association is a civil liberty, and you're correct that it doesn't change for covid, but it absolutely allows a business owner to kick people out for nearly any reason (race, religion, and gender being some of the few exceptions)
- throwoutway 5y ago
  I noticed you didn't directly answer the questions.. but I'll ask something else I don't know if the courts have ruled on this before, but pre-covid, would you have considered a business owner kicking someone out for their health status or chicken pox vaccination status an acceptable practice? Or would you argue in the case of the patron?
  - joshuamorton 5y ago
    > I noticed you didn't directly answer the questions.. but I'll ask something else I thought I did. If I didn't, I apologize, but then I wasn't clear on what exacly you were asking. > but pre-covid, would you have considered a business owner kicking someone out for their health status or chicken pox vaccination status an acceptable practice? I'd think its weird, I might even argue that it was morally wrong to do so. But I would still argue that it was the business owners right.

josephcsible 5y ago

> It should absolutely be within my rights as a business owner to ban an unvaccinated or unmasked patron, and it is a violation of my civil liberties for the government to ban this. Do you think it's also within your rights as a business owner to allow unmasked and unvaccinated patrons, or to ban masks? If so, then are you upset that these civil liberties have been violated? If not, then why do you think the opposite is?

joshuamorton 5y ago
> Do you think it's also within your rights as a business owner to allow unmasked and unvaccinated patrons, or to ban masks? Yes > If so, then are you upset that these civil liberties have been violated? No, because on the balance there is a legitimate government interest in violating them, and there aren't any less-intrusive ways to accomplish the governments legitimate goals. In other words, I'm about as upset by this as by laws that prevent me from banning black people from my store.

s1artibartfast 5y ago

This is the article. It is clearly talking about top down state mandate compelling businesses, not allowing businesses to set their own policies. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/02/opinion/covid-vaccine-mandates-civil-liberties.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/02/opinion/covid-vaccine-man... Here is the ACLU statement in opposition the SCOTUS rulings that the new york ban on church gatherings was unconstitutional https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-comment-scotus-decision-religious-challenge-covid-19-restrictions https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-comment-scotus-deci... During the pandemic, there were many mandates that infringed personal liberty. For example, in CA the governor claimed to have the power to bar healthy people leaving their house and visiting the private homes of their lovers, friends, and family. If that's not a civil liberties issue, I don't know what is.

joshuamorton 5y ago
> Here is the ACLU statement in opposition the SCOTUS rulings that the new york ban on church gatherings was unconstitutional If I'm remembering correctly, the ACLU statement here is correct. Religious gatherings were given more leeway than other large gatherings. While obviously the 1a is important, I generally agree with the ACLU that the courts approach to religion is a bit ridiculous in terms of how much deference particularly Christianity gets. Ones religion shouldn't result in getting special treatment under the law, either bad or good. > example, in CA the governor claimed to have the power to bar healthy people leaving their house and visiting the private homes of their lovers, friends, and family. No he didn't. (Or at least not in any way that came with threat of government force. If I'm wrong here you should be able to find someone who faced a fine for having a party on their home).
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  You can read the Supreme Court ruling yourself. The court found that it was religious discrimination specifically because other types of activities and gatherings were permitted. Regarding the California mandate, this language is this certainly in the mandate (I believe December 2020) . Sheriff and counties were empowered and tasked with executing the mandates, and you are correct that they largely do not enforce this part. This does not change the fact that it was part of the executive action, in both language and intent. https://www.kake.com/story/41973801/from-a-25000-fine-to-a-warning-how-are-states-enforcing-the-coronavirus-stay-at-home-orders https://www.kake.com/story/41973801/from-a-25000-fine-to-a-w...