Who Was That Masked Man?

Beginning at 7 am on Saturday morning, the answer to that question here in Maryland could be anyone riding on mass transit or patronizing a food service or retail establishment. Governor Hogan has ordered that a face covering that covers both the nose and mouth shall be worn by anyone using public transportation or by anyone older than 7 in a food service or retail establishment until the end of the current Wuhan virus emergency. Willful failure to comply will be a misdemeanor punishable by a year in jail and/or a $5,000 fine.

It seems to me that this sort of public health intervention makes more sense than some parts of the stay-at-home order, particularly as we pass the peak in the pandemic curve. Going to about our business wearing masks will be less economically disruptive than hiding. Perhaps this can be a first step to easing up on some restrictions as it becomes more obvious that some are doing more overall harm than good.

9 thoughts on “Who Was That Masked Man?

  1. some fatkinson perv is doing wheelies knowing he can wear his insignificant others panties on his face

  2. I believe government is vastly overstepping their authority virtually everywhere. They are infringing the natural rights of Americans all over the nation

    Let me ask two questions to sound out this theory. What might the governor order citizens to do at this time? Is there any limit on what the governor might mandate people do inside and outside their homes or businesses?

    What might the governor not order citizens to do at this time? Is there any limit on what the governor might mandate people not do or go within the state?

    Clearly the governor of New Jersey seems to think he has virtually unlimited power at this point because of the current circumstances. He seems to fail to recognize any of the rights protected by the Bill of Rights and seems to recognize no limits to his authority.

    A judge in another state indicated police could arrest and detain anyone on the mere suspicion of illness though police are obviously not capable of determining your health or illness to any meaningful degree.

    This is the very definition of tyranny. Will it stop? Will we allow it to continue?

    • IANAL, but from reading Jacobson v. Massachusetts and related cases, it appears that the individual states do have a great deal of power to impose temporary public health measures during an epidemic—so long as any restrictions on rights have a reasonable connection to the public health goal. In ruling that a state could use its police power for such public health measures, the Supreme Court stated “general terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression or absurd consequence.”

      A case can be made that some of the measures being taken are reasonable and not unjust or oppressive. However, there are too many instances of oppressive and absurd actions being taken by nanny state bullies. (I’m looking at you, Governor Whitmer.) If the legislatures or the courts don’t reign in the executive branches in several of the states, things may get ugly.

      • What qualifies as an “epidemic?” Surely the Spanish Flu and the Yellow Fever that used to sweep the east coast in the 18th and 19th centuries.

        But Coronavirus is hardly that. In fact, it is now obvious that it is less of a killer than the average flu seasons.

        The problem is, we see this happen time and again like Northam’s phony state of emergency at the Richmond Lobby Day. And the courts punted even though it was an obvious ploy by the governor to restrict rights of Virginians.

        If the government can implement such broad and sweeping powers in such instances, then effectively, we have no rights. Whitmer is simply the most egregious case. But the governor of New Jersey admitted he never considered Constitutional protections as he issued his edicts.

        • The WHO has declared it a pandemic and POTUS has issued emergency orders for all 50 states. Any judge is going to find that meeting the epidemic standard.

          The problem is going to arise for these ones when the court considers that sitting in your car listening to a worship service is verboten, but you can sit in your car at the Sonic down the street for as long as you like. Or you can buy lottery tickets, pot and booze or get an abortion, but you can’t receive Holy Communion.

          A reckoning is coming.

          • AG Barr is using the DoJ to intervene on the side of churches and using federal civil rights law to attempt to reign in unconstitutional acts by state and local officials. That’s one positive sign. Still, folks need to be on guard against over-the-top nannystateism. (Here’s a scary thought experiment. Image what this would be like if Bloomberg were President.)

          • And therein is the root of the problem. Quite literally a handful of medical doctors, with a very poor history of politicizing illnesses, shut down the country on some projections that were speculative and highly dubious. They may well have set off a huge depression to “defer” an illness that may turn out to be slightly less problematic than a normal flu season.

            This effectively destroys the rights of citizens when a few doctors panic.

            We have too much government and too many self-appointed “experts.”

      • An sheriff in McHenry County Illinois and state district attorney have filed suit against the Illinois Department of Health (IDPH) for refusing to provide the sheriff’s department with the identities of all the Covid-19 patients that have tested positive for the virus and been reported to the IDPH. A circuit court (county judge in Illinois) has granted the order. This is being done under the argument this will protect the lives of law enforcement officers who can be advised by dispatch if the license plate, address, or driver’s license or ID can be linked to a person that once tested positive.

        There is no reporting system in Illinois to identify persons that have recovered subsequent to the test and are no longer infectious. As this case is appealed it will be interesting to see if the appellate court allows a county judge to suspend the federal Privacy Laws contained within HIPPA based on Jacobson v. Massachusetts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s