[aslyfox]

That reminds of a joke voted into the top ten at a recent Edinburgh Festival

“I often confuse Americans and Canadians........with long words”

I don't get it

[timb64]

I don't get it

[aslyfox]

Effective Monday at 00:01 the State of Kansas will be under a " Stay At Home " order

until April 19, 2020

https://governor.kansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EO20-16.pdf

it does allow you to engage in outdoor activity if you maintain 6 feet [ 1.82 meters] separation and not gather in groups larger than 10

[Parallax]

Can you go grocery shopping, or are they going by the old wives' tale "starve a fever, feed a cold"?
(Yes, I read it. I see you can tend to the most basic of human needs.)
Fortunately, South Dakota law does does not give our governor Kim Jong Un-esque powers.

---

Last edited by Parallax; 03-28-2020 at 12:16 PM.

[aslyfox]

Can you go grocery shopping, or are they going by the old wives' tale "starve a fever, feed a cold"?

yes

Under the statewide order, Kansans must remain at home unless going to work to perform an essential function, obtaining food or medicine, seeking medical care, providing care for children, pets, family or someone who is vulnerable, or exercising outdoors while adhering to social distancing guidelines.

“You can still go outside,” the governor said. “You are not under house arrest.”

All individuals performing essential functions must work from home to the extent possible. No individual leaving their home is required to carry or present any letter, ID card or other paper proving they are allowed to leave home.

https://www.cjonline.com/news/20200328/kansas-coronavirus-update-gov-laura-k...eath-261-cases

[timb64]

Groups less than 10! Regardless of whether they’re part of your household?That seems strange/arbitrary.Might not be effective in stopping the spread.

[aslyfox]

Groups less than 10! Regardless of whether they’re part of your household?That seems strange/arbitrary.Might not be effective in stopping the spread.

the official proclamation ( follow link in Response # 930 )

states that the order does not prevent families from gathering together privately

[timb64]

In the UK the official line is no groups more than two unless they live in the same house.

But most people are avoiding getting closer than 2m to anyone they don’t have to.

[Parallax]

Groups less than 10! Regardless of whether they’re part of your household?That seems strange/arbitrary.

Arbitrary and probably unconstitutional. "Article [I] (Amendment 1 - [of the Constitution of the United States] Freedom of expression and religion) 13 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble," No mention of a maximum number allowed in any given assembly.

[beholder3]

Fortunately, South Dakota law does does not give our governor Kim Jong Un-esque powers.

Can the federal state resources in the white house do that? I read that they consider a "quarantine" for select states.
"quarantine" does sound much more strict than the abovementioned rules (but I do speculate on the meaning).


What is the relationship there between states and national administration?

[Parallax]

See my post immediately above yours.

[aslyfox]

Can the federal state resources in the white house do that? I read that they consider a "quarantine" for select states.
"quarantine" does sound much more strict than the abovementioned rules (but I do speculate on the meaning).


What is the relationship there between states and national administration?

from the Washington Post

As The Post reported in February, regulations set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention give health officials broad authority to quarantine or isolate anyone “reasonably believed” to have been exposed to a range of highly infectious diseases.

This exceptional power is rooted in the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, which allows Congress to regulate foreign and interstate commerce.

Quarantine involves the temporary confinement of people who may have been exposed to a disease but haven’t developed symptoms. Isolation separates people who are infected with a disease until they are no longer contagious. . . .

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/03/28/coronavirus-latest-news/

Regulations set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention give health officials broad authority to quarantine or isolate anyone “reasonably believed” to have been exposed to a range of highly infectious diseases. The list includes cholera, infectious tuberculosis and flus that can cause a pandemic.

This exceptional power is rooted in the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, which allows Congress to regulate foreign and interstate commerce. Quarantine involves the temporary confinement of people who may have been exposed to a disease but haven’t developed symptoms. Isolation separates people who are infected with a disease until they are no longer contagious.

“It’s like a curfew or an evacuation order if a natural disaster occurs. Just like when a hurricane is bearing down, people are ordered to leave coastal areas because no one can save them,” said Scott Burris, director of the Center for Public Health Law Research at Temple University. “If we have a reasonable prospect of stopping or slowing this virus, even if we’re doing it with mittens on, the government can take emergency action.” . . .

The federal government seldom exercises this authority, but that’s mostly because it doesn’t have to. State and local governments generally take the lead in quarantine decisions, bearing the primary responsibility for the health of their residents. When disease outbreaks do occur, health officials often opt for voluntary quarantine or isolation, and people tend to follow their instructions. . . .

If a court challenge did emerge — an unlikely scenario given that the CDC’s rules require an appeal through the agency first — judges would likely defer to public health officials, said Wendy K. Mariner, a health law professor at Boston University and author of a 2018 paper examining the intersection of civil rights and federal quarantine powers.

“They would be as concerned as anyone in the public about releasing a person who might have an infection,” Mariner said. “You want to be on the side of prevention.”

Moreover, she added, “People are pretty compliant as long as they believe that their best interests are being taken care of.”

U.S. government?s ability to quarantine possible coronavirus patients is vast - The Washington Post

[aslyfox]

Arbitrary and probably unconstitutional. "Article [I] (Amendment 1 - [of the Constitution of the United States] Freedom of expression and religion) 13 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble," No mention of a maximum number allowed in any given assembly.

yes

it could be challenged but I am sure the Court would maintain the order pending final disposition and it would take time to get through the courts

and hopefully the crisis will have passed by then

[ this is just a WAG on my part and is not meant as legal advice to be acted upon by anyone ]

[Parallax]

it would take time to get through the courts

Undoubtedly.

I understand the concept of "letter of the law" vs "spirit and intent of the law".
I don't accept that dichotomy with regard to the Constitution.

[reeftool]

I'm in NY State and we have been under "stay at home" rules for a couple of weeks now. We can go grocery shopping. some of us are still working if you are "essential". Since people are getting sick, I don't see much complaining about social distancing rules and the limiting of gatherings. I'm in an upstate area and we have relatively few cases. We would like it to stay that way. What has become an issue here is people from NYC and North Jersey coming north to camps and vacation homes and potentially bringing the virus with them.

Locally, our curve is pretty much flattened. Social distancing has worked but not for long if there aren't some sort of travel restrictions. I know this brings up constitutional issues. But if the summer people start showing up, it creates a huge problem. The summer businesses that cater to them aren't open. Our hospitals are small. A couple of dozen sick tourists will fill up available beds and leave no place for locals to go if we begin getting sick. Short of some rather unpleasant and unconstitutional measures, the risk for everyone becomes much higher.