Getting to the ‘Bare Bottom’ of Baker’s executive powers

When legal scholars discuss getting to the bottom of a case, Bare Bottom Tanning is a perfect example.

Those taking Gov. Charlie Baker to court over his pandemic-lockdown orders cite the Burlington tanning salon as an example of executive overreach.

“Despite that the tanning industry has existed for decades, the governor did not include tanning in his reopening plan,” the opponents write in their brief, adding the owner was stuck without any means to appeal.

Baker then moved tanning to Phase 2 of the reopening of the economy, then part two of Phase 2. Still, the salon owner had no voice, plaintiffs state. The same was true for other businesses left on the sidelines.

Talk about blurred lines.

“(The owner) could not seek a waiver or exemption because there was no process for her to do so,” the plaintiffs write.

The tanning salon felt that “a business that serves only one person per room, where the room is bathed in virus-killing UV radiation, and where regulations require her to clean with hospital-grade sanitizer after each customer, could reopen in Phase 1.”

Baker’s executive orders — issued under the Civil Defense Act — are set to go before the state Supreme Judicial Court Sept. 11. Opponents argue the Public Health Act is better suited for a pandemic, where local boards of health and the Legislature are more involved.

from Boston Herald https://ift.tt/3hH8jO0