Except when it’s unconstitutional. It’s almost certain that all of this won’t hold up in the supreme court.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compagnie_Francaise_de_Navigat...
Courts have repeatedly held quarantine regulations constitutional within recent years both during Ebola and COVID-19 related cases.
Never mind that health departments regularly shut down restaurants and food industry operations when food-borne disease outbreaks occur.
I guess I have a hard time believing either that the court would entertain the idea that the county has no legitimate interest in its residents’ welfare, that they would reject legal precedent older than the US constitution, or that they would take up a challenge based on a factual disagreement about epidemiology.
My mind is open to a reasoned legal argument!
Specifically the fourth amendment stipulates that the application of the law must well-justified, well-focused, and procedurally sound. In addition the first amendment guarantees freedom of assembly, which makes orders to disperse unsound.
When you tell everyone to stay home its not an individual you are impacting. You are damaging the entire social structure to prevent damage to the social structure.
Is the cure worse than the disease ? Prove the disease is worse because you are supposed to have due process to remove rights.
Let’s for the sake of argument say I thought that the county’s decision were silly. Governments do things that some people think are silly all the time. Yet, the court intervenes only in very few specific cases, under a very carefully chosen set of circumstances.
Also, while I've been happily self isolated for two months and plan to continue, I don't believe that many of these restrictions would be upheld if challenged in court.
Why can a Target stay open and sell non-essential merchandise while a competitor that doesn't also sell groceries can't? To be fair, Target and Wal-Mart would need to have ceased selling non-essentials.
But then the government is deciding what is and isn't an essential good...
Which is why I don't think it would/will hold up.
Thankfully, people with the jobs/means to stay home actually staying home has relieved some of the pressure, so restrictions can be lifted without actually causing everyone to rush to the bar or sports event.
The curves do intersect and likely already have
Beyond someone actively trying to get everyone to go outside at the same time and deliberately infecting people right now, I don't see what could pass the brandenburg test.
Imminent lawless action is a really high bar.
Where is the balance ?
Individual not being able to work and feed his family vs some of society getting sick and those who had pre existing conditions sometimes dying.
How do you predict what is worse ?
If you read about the impact of the great depression it makes covid look rather trivial. Do we repeat the great depression and is that for the benefit of society as a whole ?