Posted on 04/21/2020 6:31:34 PM PDT by ransomnote
You heard the phrase Bar None?
So far Barr is keeping up with that record.
Barr has done nothing.
somebody post the bagpipes and shoulder shrug!
Barr isn’t going to do $h!+.
Take that to the bank. Barr is a wuss.
Trump needs to do more on this. So far pretty wimpy.
He should be doing a better job on handling this virus business.
I'm not so sure about that, as now the governors will bear the brunt of any blowback.
In other words, the DOJ will not be a plaintiff in a civil lawsuit. That's because the DOJ is not a victim of this government overreach and therefore does not have the legal standing to file a lawsuit. Instead, it will bring its resources to assist anyone else who DOES have the legal standing to challenge these actions.
More ‘Soft Targets’, Barr?
Knock yourself out.
The Fourteenth Amendment. The equal protection clause in this amendment has been held by SCOTUS to incorporate all Constitutional rights at the state level. Even in a state of emergency, the rights granted in the Constitution cannot be infringed absent just cause. Certainly prohibiting drive in church services, for one example, is a blatant infringement of the right to free expression of religion. There’s NO safety issue involved since nobody is coming into personal contact.
A state of emergency gives governors extra powers, but, contrary what some seem to believe, it does not grant absolute, dictatorial powers.
This approach also shields him from political outrage when the state recovery/reopening processes turn into complete disasters -- which he knew was likely to happen no matter who was responsible for them.
HOWEVER, those lawsuits will have to be filed by people or organizations in each state where this abusive behavior by the governors is taking place. The DOJ will then bring its legal firepower to court on behalf of the plaintiffs.
The good news here is that Federal civil rights violations are one of the few areas of the law where plaintiffs can recover their legal fees as part of the settlement.
I actually think this kind of warning from the DOJ is going to scare a lot of these governors into opening their states much more quickly than they wanted.
Your second sentence is 100% correct.
The first sentence however is not.
I nominate Governor Ige of Hawai’i.
Using drones and helicopters to track, follow and arrest people that have been walking alone on trails in the woods
May heil whitmer top the list!
I’m confused. My post has three sentences. LOL.
We have a document that tells us how to handle most situations. We haven’t really been using it much since the 1930s or so, but I can hardly fault Trump for at least trying to abide by it. It’s called the Constitution, and the applicable part here is the Tenth Amendment. The Federal government does not have dealing with emergencies as one of its enumerated powers. Therefore, per A10, that power devolves upon the state governments.
That’s the way the system is supposed to work, and did work for about the first 72 years after the Constitution was implemented. During that time, the Feds basically ran the post office, the army, the navy, and the diplomatic corps. Everything else was handled at the state level. It was another emergency that started to create the idea that the Feds should do more, namely the secession of some of the southern state’s and the ensuing civil war. The Great Depression and the New Deal completed the behemoth.
The idea of federalism is sound: what works for New York City during a pandemic such as this is going to be much different from what works in states like Montana or South Dakota. This is a very geographically and socially diverse country. Federalism gives a framework for the application of a diversity of solutions to be applied in different locations. A one size fits all approach is likely never to do much good. The fault lies with the governors who have overstepped their authority, not with Trump and his attempt to address this situation without going outside of Constitutional limits.
Yeah, he’s on it. /s
Excellent assessment. All points are spot-on.
Or did he actually do the citizens a favor, to expose how ridiculous they are.
Yes, it seems that someone must have standing to sue, so it would have to be citizens of any particular state doing the suing. Of course we all know there are groups that help individuals to do this.
Thank you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.