<div dir="ltr">The news coverage of this has been odd. The order is definitely <i style="text-decoration-line:underline">not</i> countering a "governor's stay-at-home order", which is what I see most people saying. The governor took emergency powers, made a few orders directly, and then instructed the Health Secretary to take the lead on state-wide response. The Health Secretary then issued several orders under her own signatory authority, only one of which was challenged (Order 28). The ruling is that <u><i>that particular order</i></u> was so broad and general as to count as executive branch rule making, which has its own set of rules, including a period of time for review by the legislature. <div><br></div><div>Full decision:</div><div><a href="https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf">https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf</a> <br><div><br></div><div>From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1: </div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div>
This case is about the
assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not
to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not
"essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey
Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a
$250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers'
Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor. </div></blockquote><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div>From paragraph 7:</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div><div>On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also
titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the
Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration.
Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm,
Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of
the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3),
(4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in
Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with
certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by
up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order
28 also: </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems
essential. </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to
"cease all activities" except for minimum operations that
Palm deemed basic.
</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any
number" "not part of a single household." </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall
remain closed" for the remainder of the year. </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services." </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed
regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf
courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving
ranges and miniature golf must remain closed." </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas. </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except
for take-out or delivery service. </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than
10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals. </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div><div><div><div>* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any
person not "residing in a single living unit or household."
</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></blockquote><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div dir="ltr"><div></div></div><div dir="ltr"><a href="mailto:echarles@american.edu" target="_blank"></a></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <<a href="mailto:sasmyth@swcp.com">sasmyth@swcp.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Friammers -</p>
<p>Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big
court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html" target="_blank">https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html</a></p>
<div style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:14px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 20px;font-size:20px;line-height:1.7em;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><i>In
a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged
on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether
her emergency order was a good idea.</i></p>
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:14px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 20px;font-size:20px;line-height:1.7em;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><i>“The
order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response
to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the
question before the court.”</i></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>I'm (nicely?) split on
issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.
I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own
"safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state
level. I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of
authority" will ultimately be decided against those.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Anecdotally, in the
meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have
returned (without masks and not observing social distancing
guidelines). <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This seems like a good
test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".
Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network
transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a
continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to
believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media
coverage and hypochondria). The best case (and one I mostly hope
for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard
the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one
another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest
estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20%
out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o
masks/social-distance measures?). <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Given that the courts
may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the
governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across
republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge
in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I find a bit of
cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all
three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>The rule of law is important in our society and if a
governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some
have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.</li>
<li>There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above
is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and
executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well
as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those
states (and among states who have significant mixing *with*
those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were
in late March.</li>
<li>I don't like the idea of telling others what to do
(wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I
also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives,
and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary
and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt
laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of
deadly disease". But how does that jive with my threshold
for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"? <br>
</li>
</ol>
<p>These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of
Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put
a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how
well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.</p>
<p>- Steve<br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> <br>
</blockquote></div>