Read on Twitter
And here we go: Arguments over @GovEvers' mask mandate begin at the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Here's a primer: https://upnorthnewswi.com/2020/11/13/arguments-in-yet-another-lawsuit-over-measures-to-protect-public-begin-monday-in-wi-supreme-court/
. @GovEvers has issued three COVID-related emergency orders. Conservative attorney Matthew Fernholz is arguing Evers has no authority to issue several orders
for the same pandemic.
"The numbers are going to go up and down on a daily basis. That doesn’t justify a new emergency.”
for the same pandemic.
"The numbers are going to go up and down on a daily basis. That doesn’t justify a new emergency.”
. @judgekarofsky asks why COVID-19 doesn't meet the definition of a "novel" public health event.
Fernholz: Because we've been dealing with it for months.
Fernholz: Because we've been dealing with it for months.
Justice Ann Walsh Bradley: @CDCgov still says it's a novel virus. "Why should your definition of a novel virus trump the CDC?"
. @RickEsenberg of @WILawLiberty is presenting arguments now.
"At some point we must return to constitutional order," he says, talking about the Legislature's balance of powers.
@judgekarofsky cuts in: Has the Legislature been unable to convene for the past 6+ months?
"At some point we must return to constitutional order," he says, talking about the Legislature's balance of powers.
@judgekarofsky cuts in: Has the Legislature been unable to convene for the past 6+ months?
"The Legislature actually has a lot of power here, should they choose to use it," @judgekarofsky says.
@SpeakerVos and @SenFitzgerald haven't brought in their chambers to pass a bill in 215 days.
@SpeakerVos and @SenFitzgerald haven't brought in their chambers to pass a bill in 215 days.
. @JudgeBradleyWI: "Has the Legislature abdicated its responsibility" by not meeting?
The Legislature could end any of @GovEvers emergency declarations at any time, but again, @SpeakerVos and @SenFitzgerald haven't brought their chambers in for 215 days.
Assistant Attorney General Hannah Jurss steps up for arguments.
She points out the Supreme Court's ruling won't just affect @GovEvers during COVID. It will set a precedent for all governors for all emergencies going forward.
She points out the Supreme Court's ruling won't just affect @GovEvers during COVID. It will set a precedent for all governors for all emergencies going forward.
. @judgehagedorn, a conservative who has proved to be a swing vote, seems to be against @GovEvers in this case.
He compares governors' emergency power to a parent letting their kid play around with a phone for a certain amount of time (in the gov's case, 60 days).
He compares governors' emergency power to a parent letting their kid play around with a phone for a certain amount of time (in the gov's case, 60 days).
Jurss, unconvinced, says the Legislature "can revoke the order at will."
. @judgekarofsky asks Fernholz, the attorney against @govevers' order, if @ScottWalker was issuing illegal emergency orders when he made multiple emergency declarations over propane shortages in several winters.
Fernholz refuses to answer.
Fernholz refuses to answer.
