How Far Can Donald Trump Actually Go in Responding to COVID-19?
States are often given deference when responding to a health crisis, but some governors are accusing the president of not doing enough.
March 30, 2020 at 06:47 PM
5 minute read
Actions taken by President Donald Trump and state officials in response to the coronavirus pandemic are raising fresh questions about just how far executive powers can go during a public health crisis.
State and local officials are typically given deference in leading the response during a public health crisis, which can lead to a more timely, albeit scattered, response. At the same time, some governors are criticizing Trump for not moving faster at the federal level to offer guidance or additional support to their states.
In a legal fact check updated Monday, the American Bar Association said Trump may have the authority under the Commerce Clause to order a national quarantine or other mandate in response to the pandemic. Trump has not given any indication that he will do so, instead deferring to individual governors, states and local officials to issue such orders.
"American federalism is our greatest strength and our greatest weakness. But the weakness of federalism is really being shown very clearly here when we have a pandemic, a once-in-a-century event that requires a national response in a uniform way," said Lawrence Gostin, a public health law professor at Georgetown University. "We don't have that, we have a patchwork across the states."
"So that patchwork is going to be a big impediment to us, bringing the epidemic under control in the United States," he added.
Trump set off concerns for residents of New York and parts of New Jersey and Connecticut when he said March 28 that he was considering a quarantine for the region to contain the spread of COVID-19.
Hours later, Trump said he would not issue a quarantine, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would issue a travel advisory for those in the tristate area. The next day, Trump announced that federal social distancing guidelines enacted over the respiratory virus will remain in place through April 30.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 1902 upheld local officials' authority to issue statewide quarantines, unless superseded by Congress. Gostin said Congress would have to approve an order blocking people from leaving or entering states, as it's the only body with the power to regulate interstate travel.
Gostin said some of the actions Trump has taken, like closing the borders, are well within his rights as president. But, he said, the president could have taken other steps outside of the legal sphere to unite the country's governors in combating the pandemic.
"He's not provided any guidance to governors about whether they should do aggressive social distancing, many of the red states that support Trump, they're not doing enough. So he's not really coordinating governors and mayors to row with a single oar," Gostin said. "Instead we see the president is criticizing governors, governors are criticizing the president, governors are taking very different actions themselves."
Michele Goodwin, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine, said questions about civil liberties are also being raised by the pandemic.
She said while authorities may have a right to issue orders to combat the spread of the virus, Americans have to be vigilant that the orders are actually related to the pandemic.
She pointed to the potential tracking of phone location data, to ensure Americans are staying home except for essential needs, as an area that could raise privacy concerns.
"Just because the government has authority to do a thing, it has to be for legitimate reasons, and it can't be expansive beyond the cause or call for that particular issue," Goodwin said.
She further predicted that legal challenges to government actions may also play out after orders issued in response to the pandemic are lifted, as many federal courts have closed down except for emergency and essential proceedings. However, Goodwin noted there may be instances where Americans are seeking injunctive relief in response to the pandemic, and that courts may move swiftly in those cases.
She also said that some executive actions people have called for Trump to take, like utilizing the Defense Production Act, could also raise questions of civil liberties. The president invoked the act March 27 to order General Motors to start making ventilators, a process the manufacturing giant said it had already begun.
"There are some times in which we want the government to use certain powers and authorities and to use them swiftly," Goodwin said. "But again, it must all be measured."
Gostin also raised concerns about how individual judges could approach any challenges filed over actions taken in response to the coronavirus restrictions, noting rulings should be based on scientific evidence.
"Courts don't know how to separate good from not-so-good science," Gostin said.
He said in cases stemming from the pandemics, judges should turn to federal and state health guidelines to help make their rulings.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
‘A Force of Nature’: Littler Mendelson Shareholder Michael Lotito Dies At 76
3 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
- 2Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 3Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 4Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 5Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250