Rejecting the group of business owners’ challenge, Saif said Baker’s orders also did not violate Article VII of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, which provides for the separation of powers between the three branches of government, and “did not violate the plaintiff’s federal” or procedural and significant reasons. The constitutional right of the state to proceed or free assembly. “
Cypher noted the significant human toll of the epidemic.
“Covid-19 has taken a devastating toll on the Commonwealth, the United States and the world,” he wrote. “As of this writing, in Massachusetts alone, more than 250,000 people have been infected and 10,000 have died. During the April 2020 surge in Massachusetts, the number of infections often exceeded 1,500 per day, and more than a hundred deaths per day from Covid-19 on most days of the month. Medical toll In addition to COVID-19, individual toll resulting from virus and control measures is important. Behind every infection and every death are those who could not visit any loved ones in the hospital due to the limitation of visits or traditionally mourn the loss of a loved one with family and friends. “
This Suit Michael P. of the New Civil Liberties Alliance. DeGrandis and Att Torny and board chairman Daniel Huntley Webb – challenging Baker’s authority on behalf of 10 prosecutors, including hair and tanning salon owners, a North End restaurateur, and two church pastors. Fiscal Alliance Foundation.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance is a Washington, DC-based nonprofit that advocates what it calls an “unconstitutional administrative state” and has contributed more than million 2 million to the Charles Koch Foundation. Nonprofit Filingings.
DeGrandis, a senior attorney in the coalition, rebuked the SJC’s ruling in a statement.
“Massachusetts has now adhered to the principles of freedom from the cradle to the grave of the American Revolution,” Degrandis said. “John ams dams must have received the news in his tomb that he and his fellow patriots had fought hard to get rid of arbitrary royal decrees, and established a republic based on the rule of law and the consent of the regime. Be what Adams feared the most. ”
DeGrandis’s words echoed the statement of Mark Chanoweth, the alliance’s executive director and general adviser.
“Among other problems, it rejects the notion that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court relies so heavily today in its decision today on the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, which was overturned last month,” Chenoweth said. “What do the judges think? … The NCLA will closely examine the strong reasons for appealing this decision, notable in its equestrian disregard for the civil liberties of Americans. “
Baker’s office did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
The plaintiff in the lawsuit partially focused on the words 1950 Civil Defense Act, A Cold War-era law that gives the governor broad powers in the state of enemy attacks, vandalism, storms, fires, floods or “other natural causes.” The plaintiff argued that there was no mention of diseases in the law.
But there were differences among the judges. Cypher wrote to the court that, when examining the sentence ‘other natural causes’ … it is clear that this syntax is epidemic on the basis of the Covid-19 epidemic.
“Covid-19 is an epidemic that has killed more than a million people worldwide, spreads from person to person, effective vaccines have not yet been delivered, there is no known cure, and the Commonwealth is on the rise. The hospital system has been threatened with overthrow. , It is a natural cause for which measures need to be taken to ‘safeguard public peace, health, safety and security and to save the lives and property of the people of the Commonwealth’.
However, he acknowledged that the scope of the Civil Defense Act or CDA is limited and that not every public health emergency can justify actions taken during an epidemic.
“The distinctive feature of the COVID-19 epidemic is that it has created a situation that cannot be directed only locally,” Cypher wrote. “Only those public health crises that exceed the resources and capabilities of local governments and health boards, and therefore require the coordination and resources available under the CDA, are considered for coverage under the CDA. Therefore, although we believe that the COVID-19 epidemic occurs in the CDA, we cannot assume that all public health crises fall within the CDA, or that when we show stable improvement in COVID-19 related public health data Do not hold. The threshold will not be exceeded where it no longer constitutes an emergency under the CDA. “
The report used material from previous stories by the Globe.
Travis Anderson can be reached at [email protected] Follow him on Twitter @ TAG l be b. Matstout can be reached at [email protected] Follow him on Twitter mattpstout. Martin Finuka can be reached at martin.finuka @ globe.com.
Amateur web specialist. General food junkie. Typical zombie enthusiast. Avid music trailblazer. Lifelong explorer.