[ExI] Some virus statistics

Wed Jul 15 19:38:41 UTC 2020

While you're correct, those are runarounds to allow legislating from the
executive branch which is almost certainly unconstitutional when applied in
such a carte blanche manner.  It is certainly not in the spirit of the
Constitution and the idea of separating the legislative and executive
branches of government.

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 3:29 PM SR Ballard via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> Spike, what you are saying is simply not true.
>
> My state legislature (Texas) passed a law that says if there is a declared
> emergency, any executive order the governor makes, related to that
> emergency, has the full force of a law.
>
> Your state likely has a similar law.
>
> I checked, and in fact it does.
>
> > In turning to the statutes, we need to look at the California Emergency
> Services Act, which is found in the Government Code. Title 2 of the
> Government Code deals with the Government of the State of California.
> Division 1, Chapter 7 sets forth the California Emergency Services Act,
> which is found in Sections 8550 – 8669.7. In addition, Article 3 of Chapter
> 7 provides for Powers of the Governor, which are contained in Sections 8565
> – 8899.72.
>
> Executive orders have the full force of law
> > *8567. (a) The Governor may make, amend, and rescind orders and
> regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter. The
> orders and regulations shall have the force and effect of law. Due
> consideration shall be given to the plans of the federal government in
> preparing the orders and regulations. The Governor shall cause widespread
> publicity and notice to be given to all such orders and regulations, or
> amendments or rescissions thereof.*
>
> When the emergency is over, the orders expire
> >(b) Orders and regulations, or amendments or rescissions thereof, issued
> during a state of war emergency or state of emergency shall be in writing
> and shall take effect immediately upon their issuance. Whenever the state
> of war emergency or state of emergency has been terminated, the orders and
> regulations shall be of no further force or effect.
>
> The governor can send the police to enforce his orders
>  >*8627. During a state of emergency the Governor shall, to the extent he
> deems necessary, have complete authority over all agencies of the state
> government and the right to exercise within the area designated all police
> power vested in the state by the Constitution and laws of the State of
> California in order to effectuate the purposes of this chapter. In exercise
> thereof, he shall promulgate, issue, and enforce such orders and
> regulations as he deems necessary, in accordance with the provisions of
> Section 8567.*
>
> So in conclusion:
> >*The Governor may make [...] regulations *
> >*The [...] regulations shall have the force and effect of law.*
> >regulations, [...] shall take effect immediately upon their issuance.
> >*Governor shall [...] have complete authority over all agencies of the
> state government **and the right to exercise within the area designated
> all police power*
>
> SR Ballard
>
> On Jul 15, 2020, at 1:18 PM, spike jones via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> *On Behalf
> Of *Stathis Papaioannou via extropy-chat
>
> If states want to do make rules on giving themselves the authority to make
> people wear masks and so on, then states need to write that into their
> constitutions and have their legislatures vote on them.  None of that has
> happened.
>
> >…I don’t know how your local laws work but I assume people can be fined
> by local authorities for relatively harmless things such as not picking up
> their dog’s poop, so why would fining people for not wearing a mask be more
> difficult to implement?
>
> --
>
> Stathis Papaioannou
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> City governments do have a lot of leeway on what laws they pass.  Ours
> never did.  The state governor issue orders, but those do not apply to us
> unless there is an actual law that we are required to wear masks, which
> there are not.  Meanwhile, I don’t bother blaming the California governor
> for his actions when he has insufficient authority to stop the surge in
> infections.
>
>
>
> Legislatures make law.  Executive branches can only guide enforcement on
> how to enforce laws that exist.  The Fed can declare martial law, which it
> has not done.  The state can declare a public health emergency which
> enables the governor to direct some additional funding.  Businesses can
> require patrons wear a mask, which they are doing.  There is no known law
> or enforcement mechanism for the governor to require masks.  Some do, some
> do not.
>
>
>
> Stathis the real point of all this is that we get it: face masks indoors
> makes sense.  Handing government arbitrary power in response to a crisis
> does not.  So we don’t.  It really is that simple.
>
>
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200715/7cd83741/attachment-0001.htm>