Posted on 08/11/2020 12:53:27 PM PDT by Kaslin
In a national panic, Americans permitted executives to take power—to declare states of emergency and to implement lockdowns—and now those executives won’t give that power back.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia often noted that the primary safeguard of our constitutional liberties is the structure of our government. Every banana republic has a bill of rights, he once said, but the strength of the American system is the separation of powers.
At the federal level, there are three separate, co-equal branches of government that must operate together for our representative republic to function properly, and this balance of power is mirrored at the state level. Unhappily, our system today is not functioning as designed.
Since March, the separation of powers has been off-kilter, shifted disproportionately to state executives, who are ruling outside the boundaries of their proper authority. In a moment of national panic, Americans permitted their state and local executives to take power—to declare states of emergency and to implement lockdowns—and now those executives won’t give that power back.
Legally, the executives are operating pursuant to their “emergency powers.” Executives are often authorized to declare a state of emergency, which activates emergency plans that the state and its localities have prepared, and transfers significant control to the governor. Although it varies by state, this authority is typically quite broad.
If you examine any of the lockdown or mandatory masking orders, you will largely see a relatively formulaic approach. First, the edict will recite the facts that support the claim there is an ongoing catastrophe, then it will list the legal authority, and finally the resulting mandates.
For example, in Virginia, when Gov. Ralph Northam issued his masking order, he called upon the powers vested in him by Article V of the Virginia Constitution, then pointed to § 44-146.17 of the Virginia Code. That’s the meat of the matter. That section of the code spells out the scope of the state executive’s authority during an emergency.
Every state legislature can define these powers differently and include specific limitations. In Virginia, the legislature inserted a provision that no emergency action by the governor could “limit or prohibit” the right to keep and bear arms.
That is why a gun range in Virginia was able to sue earlier this year and win an injunction that permitted it to reopen during the height of the lockdown. Although the judge said the injunction did not apply across the commonwealth, that discrete win signaled to Northam that he had gone too far, and he quickly issued a new order allowing all gun ranges to reopen.
Most state statutes automatically terminate emergency authority after a 30- or 60-day period, unless specifically extended by the governor. This highlights that emergencies are assumed to be of short duration. Our current quandary is that governors are using COVID as an excuse to extend their authority indefinitely.
If the governors are empowered to declare and continue a state of emergency, what is the remedy? The Founders believed the first and most powerful check on the executive would be the ballot box. In modern practice, one of the best checks on the individual policies an executive contemplates has been the resistance of the electorate in real-time. The coronavirus crisis has once again proved that state and local races matter deeply.
The judgment of the electorate, though, is usually most potent as a prophylactic or an immediate reprimand. Once the executive has taken the power and the people have acquiesced, it requires a much more forceful and unified resistance to roll back the overreach. Unfortunately, in our current crisis, the necessary momentum is just not there—or not yet sufficiently organized and vocal.
A structural check on the executive is the intervention of a coordinate branch of government—the balance of powers working as designed. Most state statutes provide for the termination of the emergency either by executive order or joint resolution of the legislature.
To declare emergencies, to close businesses and confine Americans to their homes, to mandate masks, to limit access to churches, to suspend your civil liberties, the governors point to power enumerated by statute—that is, defined by the legislature. Where the legislature defined the terms, it can redefine the terms. Where they are empowered to do so, state legislatures must begin to declare the emergency at an end, rebuke the governors’ power grabs, and recalibrate the allocation of power to its proper balance among the branches.
Unfortunately, rather than reclaiming authority from governors, many state legislatures right now are fighting over which branch gets to decide how to spend the federal dollars states are receiving in emergency aid. It is not clear that the balance of power will naturally revert to normal any time soon.
These states of emergency have provided vast, new power to individual governors and various political factions, and they will not give that power up easily or soon. It must be formally taken from them. If it is not, the executives will continue to chip away at our fundamental liberties, implement initiatives the electorate would not condone via their representatives, and generally undermine the spirit of independence and self-reliance that are hallmarks of American liberty.
An executive’s emergency authority is a good thing when properly exercised. An executive’s ability to move swiftly in a time of crisis is a strength of our system. The Founders robustly debated the extent and contours of executive powers.
The executive’s speed and dispatch are indispensable in the realm of war and national security, but these traits are also critical in time of national emergency. However, as the Framers knew and we’ve experienced, this type of centralized authority is also very dangerous when abused.
The American system of government is comprised of three branches of government that must operate together for our system to work. When exercised, the “emergency power” of the executive fundamentally changes the nature of our government by sweeping authority from the other branches and placing it in one.
The current widespread and indefinite “emergency rule” is doing violence to our system of self-government and to the separation of powers—which is the real defense that preserves our rights. It is high time to end the tyranny of the executives.
Molly McCann is Of Counsel with Sidney Powell, P.C. and lives and works in the Washington, D.C. metro area. In her free time, Molly is active in conservative policy and directs the Phyllis Schlafly Virginia Constitution Center, organizing events for young professionals.
Apparently they can.
If no one stops them, they can...
No one can reasonably claim that, after 5 months, there is still an “emergency” requiring the executive to wield dictatorial powers. If there needs to be laws regarding masks or lockdowns, then there has been plenty of time for the state legislatures to convene and pass them.
Justice John Devine wrote a concurrence in the Texas Supreme Court’s recent denial of a challenge to the lockdown order. He agreed, correctly, that there was no jurisdiction for a direct mandamus petition to the Texas Supreme Court in that case. But he also suggested that Governor Abbot’s orders and the Disaster Act that purportedly delegates sweeping powers to him violate the Texas Constitution: specifically the nondelegation doctrine and the Texas Constitution’s provision that only the legislature may suspend laws.
Hopefully someone gets this issue properly before the Texas Supreme Court sooner rather than later.
NM governor extends her order every 2 weeks with amended orders and more restrictions.
Their clocks are all broken and they’re never correct, even twice a day, like most broken clocks are said to be.
Yep and this is just the beginning.
PA —joint resolution ending the SOE passed and the guys in black dresses said no
A stopped broken clock is right twice a day. Now a broken clock that simply moves too slow, that might be wrong twice a day, if time catches up and passes it twice.
PA Legislature tried a novel move to end the emergency around a threatened veto and the courts said no. Even Doug Mastriano, one of the co-sponsors, said they got a bum steer from their lawyers.
They are going to try again. They need to flip a few Democrats to override a veto that is surely coming. Pressure is on them as even purple areas of the state are pretty fed-up now. Leadership says they can really use Trump’s help with this but thusfar it seems he’s been unresponsive.
Prospects also look good for an amendment to the State Constitution to prevent this from happening again in the future.
The Democrat governors and mayors are not going to willingly give your freedoms back. If you want them, you are going to have to take them!
In MA the RINO Gov. recently rolled back the “reopening” and put more restrictions in place. For example, a group of 9 friends outside doesn’t need to wear face diapers, but the smart virus realizes that once you reach 10 people it will pounce and infect everyone.
Yes. And there is an effort being made here.
Problem is even though we have Republican majorities it’s not enough to override a veto.
Exactly. These “emergency” orders should have ended withing 30 days and the various legislatures convinced handle it.
There are a lot of thing governors legally can’t do — yet they do — and they get away with it.
I would not bet large sums on that proposition.
The fact that John Roberts ducked out on the First Amendment is positively chilling.
Where is the legal challenge to stop it?
So they will find something else. I hear racism is also a public health emergency.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.