” if the nurse begins to develop symptoms, she too will be isolated so that she poses no risk to the public. “
Seems there is the potential of putting people at risk this way. I guess I don’t see the harm in being proactive.
My point was simply that the poster I was responding to did not seem to be complaining that the woman in Oregon had been monitored v. quarantined, but that what Hickox is doing now ((active monitoring, no quarantine) is the same as the woman in Oregon.
Sometimes trying to salvage and keep the Constitution draws some fine lines. When being proactive means effectively arresting/detaining someone "just in case", then the next step is to do so "Just because (pick any reason)".
Judge Napolitano of Fx News outlined the Constitutional reasons to not take this step "proactively" very well last week.