Opinion: Constitutionality of Coronavirus Lockdowns in Question

By Jared Dyson

constitution

In the past couple of months, we have seen our country go into a variety of different stay orders. In each case, the states have created an overreach that infringes on personal rights. Those rights which are granted to us by both our creator and our founding documents.

The Sacramento Bee ran an article in March that claimed the stay orders were constitutional. The argument was that the government could expand its power in a public health crisis. The result is a massive government rule that overrides any personal rights.

The argument is based on the 1905 ruling of Jacobson v Massachusetts. In that case, the state of Massachusetts wanted to force residents to take smallpox vaccines. There was not one single mention of mandatory quarantine or stay orders in that case.

The National Institute of Health (NIH) looked into the case and said that they do not believe it is constitutional for a state to force someone to take vaccines. They argued for the segregation of infected versus non-infected individuals. Later in the same article, the NIH concluded that mandatory quarantine would most likely be unconstitutional as well.

I have shared that I do not believe these stay orders are constitutional. On Wednesday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed as it struck down the stay orders in the state. Now, Democrats across the country are saying that the measures were saving lives and preventing coronavirus spread, and soon countless people will die.

It’s the same story that we have heard for months about the coronavirus. These are the same arguments that ignore the data and the information that has been learned.

Coronavirus infections are more widespread than we ever thought. Well, more extensive than the media would indicate. If someone considers the amount of travel to and from China, it’s easy to understand that this virus was here long before late January or February. There is no doubt this virus was in the United States in 2019.

But the media will continue to argue that. They will continue to push the narrative for the shutdowns and the stay orders. It is all part of the propaganda that they will push for the Democrats. It is all an effort to try to eliminate President Trump.

Finally, others are starting to recognize the error in giving up their freedoms for these stay orders. The Hill reports over a dozen other suits are making their way through the courts in regards to the stay orders. It’s about time.

No one is arguing the need to protect those who are most vulnerable. Many are willing to wear masks, socially distance, or even encourage those who are most at risk to stay at home. The issue is that millions of Americans are suffering at the hand of the stay orders.

To date, the United States has approximately 1.5 million cases of the coronavirus. We have tested more than any other nation and are finding asymptomatic cases every day. So there are 1.5 million people suffering from the coronavirus, but we have over 36.5 million suffering from the stay home orders. How does that seem logical?

We are far from overwhelming the healthcare system. Most people who may contract the virus will recover without difficulty. Why are we forcing so many Americans to suffer?

It is time for a common-sense approach to reopening our country. The stay orders have been an overreach and need to be eliminated. I am more than happy to wear a mask and social distance as are most Americans. It’s time to get our economy back on track.

Jared Dyson is the Editor-in-Chief at The Liberty Loft and host of The Jared Dyson Show podcast.

In the past couple of months, we have seen our country go into a variety of different stay orders. In each case, the states have created an overreach that infringes on personal rights. Those rights which are granted to us by both our creator and our founding documents.

The Sacramento Bee ran an article in March that claimed the stay orders were constitutional. The argument was that the government could expand its power in a public health crisis. The result is a massive government rule that overrides any personal rights.

The argument is based on the 1905 ruling of Jacobson v Massachusetts. In that case, the state of Massachusetts wanted to force residents to take smallpox vaccines. There was not one single mention of mandatory quarantine or stay orders in that case.

The National Institute of Health (NIH) looked into the case and said that they do not believe it is constitutional for a state to force someone to take vaccines. They argued for the segregation of infected versus non-infected individuals. Later in the same article, the NIH concluded that mandatory quarantine would most likely be unconstitutional as well.

I have shared that I do not believe these stay orders are constitutional. On Wednesday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed as it struck down the stay orders in the state. Now, Democrats across the country are saying that the measures were saving lives and preventing coronavirus spread, and soon countless people will die.

It’s the same story that we have heard for months about the coronavirus. These are the same arguments that ignore the data and the information that has been learned.

Coronavirus infections are more widespread than we ever thought. Well, more extensive than the media would indicate. If someone considers the amount of travel to and from China, it’s easy to understand that this virus was here long before late January or February. There is no doubt this virus was in the United States in 2019.

But the media will continue to argue that. They will continue to push the narrative for the shutdowns and the stay orders. It is all part of the propaganda that they will push for the Democrats. It is all an effort to try to eliminate President Trump.

Finally, others are starting to recognize the error in giving up their freedoms for these stay orders. The Hill reports over a dozen other suits are making their way through the courts in regards to the stay orders. It’s about time.

No one is arguing the need to protect those who are most vulnerable. Many are willing to wear masks, socially distance, or even encourage those who are most at risk to stay at home. The issue is that millions of Americans are suffering at the hand of the stay orders.

To date, the United States has approximately 1.5 million cases of the coronavirus. We have tested more than any other nation and are finding asymptomatic cases every day. So there are 1.5 million people suffering from the coronavirus, but we have over 36.5 million suffering from the stay home orders. How does that seem logical?

We are far from overwhelming the healthcare system. Most people who may contract the virus will recover without difficulty. Why are we forcing so many Americans to suffer?

It is time for a common-sense approach to reopening our country. The stay orders have been an overreach and need to be eliminated. I am more than happy to wear a mask and social distance as are most Americans. It’s time to get our economy back on track.

Jared Dyson is the Editor-in-Chief at The Liberty Loft and host of The Jared Dyson Show podcast.

Opinion: Constitutionality of Coronavirus Lockdowns in Question is original content from Conservative Daily News – Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust

About the author:
Tell us something about yourself.

Get involved!

Get Connected! 0Censor Community BETA

Come and join our community. Expand your network and get to know new people!

Comments

No comments yet