Posted on 10/04/2021 12:04:21 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
BOSTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court decided Monday against hearing an appeal of a decision that found Gov. Charlie Baker did not overstep his authority with sweeping orders to close businesses and limit gatherings to control the coronavirus early in the pandemic.
The nation’s highest court announced without comment Monday that it would not consider the appeal.
The lawsuit argued that Baker had no authority to issue public health-related orders under the state’s Civil Defense Act, which it said was designed to protect the state from foreign invasions, insurrections, and catastrophic events like hurricanes and fires.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, the state’s highest court, in December rejected the challenge, brought on behalf of a group including salon owners, pastors and the headmaster of a private school. They accused the Republican governor of exercising “legislative police power” by declaring a state of emergency under the Civil Defense Act.
The governor declared a state of emergency March 10, 2020, giving him greater power to take actions like shutting down events with large gatherings of people or gaining access to buildings or stockpiling protective gear.
He went on to issue a slew of emergency orders prohibiting gatherings of a certain size, closing certain businesses and mandating masks aimed at slowing the spread of the disease in the hard-hit state.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
What a spineless, worthless crew of "conservatives" we have on the court.
Good - States are supposed to be sovereign. Let the State deal with it.
SCOTUS Justices: It’s all that complicated, messy legal stuff again. Too scary to have to untangle it all and make a firm, decisive ruling on it. Is it vacation recess time yet?
Great, when they hear the 2nd amendment case they'll probably find that Americans possessing firearms is illegal.
The Supreme Court doesn’t even have the authority to rule on matters that are entirely based on State law.
I agree, This is a state matter all the way. If you think your governor sucks then vote him out.
Interestingly, the ruling was published in Mandarin Chinese.
It actually is far more complicated than the average lay person realizes.
If there isn’t a substantial federal question, then SCOTUS doesn’t have the authority to rule.
For matters of interpretation based solely on a State Constitutional provision, the State Supreme Court is the highest authority, not SCOTUS.
There have to be some standards.
I’ll welcome any relief the SCOTUS can give the decent
people of California.
The Left should only be able to go so far. Right now
they know no limits, including the Founding Documents.
This was on an appeal to the original decision.
Exactly, this is a political battle within the individual states, let the people within their states battle out those political questions. Unfortunately many people here don’t want Constitutional rulings from the USSC, they just want ideological rulings that favor our side.
Bribed and blackmailed.
Start laws can't be unconstitutional?
So-called conservatives... Spineless indeed!
This refusal to address the issue simply identifies them as deep-state tools...
Mark Levin has spoken extensively about the Supreme Court.
His book, “Men in Black” outlines how SCOTUS is destroying America...
Used copies available for $4.00ish or less (including shipping) on Ebay.
Useless lazy institution. Just came off a three month vacation. Cut their salaries by 25%. Can redeem themselves with righteous decisions.
Agree with you.
Don't know the specifics of the Baker case, but if the governor's so-called authority oversteps the Constitution, then it is those who support Baker's actions who don't want constitutional rulings.
“...then vote him out.”
Doesn’t work.
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.