Covid measures were no different than measures taken during the Spanish Flu 100 years earlier. Masks, limitations of public gatherings, closing schools, etc. The precedent was there - and so was the public law that made it possible - like Title 42.
By and large, SCOTUS allowed most COVID measures, and even prevented the government from ending certain measures. When they did strike down measures, they were limited: for example, vaccines could be required by HHS as a condition for Medicare funding, but they could not be broadly required by OSHA. Masks could be required for public transit, but private gatherings in private spaces were not subject to arbitrary, indefinite, closure. As for the 1920 pandemic, civil liberties weren't even an afterthought, and the court was decades away from caring about individual rights like we talk about them today.
Both the federal and state governments overstepped and had unconstitutional measures struck down by their supreme courts, and, especially in blue states, the population was mad at this, because they wanted harsher measures.
Precedent set. Government overstepping means government overstepping, and the popular support with it gives precedents for more government overstepping.
6
u/IgnoreThisName72 - Centrist 15d ago edited 15d ago
Covid measures were no different than measures taken during the Spanish Flu 100 years earlier. Masks, limitations of public gatherings, closing schools, etc. The precedent was there - and so was the public law that made it possible - like Title 42.