Healey plays ‘Trump’ card in defense of Baker’s coronavirus response
Gov. Charlie Baker’s pandemic executive orders — from travel bans to the phased reopening of the economy — are heading for a showdown before the state’s highest court, with Attorney General Maura Healey citing President Trump in the governor’s defense.
Healey, the lead author in Baker’s defense, references Trump’s March 13 announcement of a COVID-19 national emergency. Three days before, Baker declared a similar state of emergency in Massachusetts.
“This pandemic, which has killed 822,000 globally, including more than 8,700 Massachusetts residents statewide, is precisely the kind of civil defense emergency that warrants a coordinated state level response by the Governor under the Act,” Healey writes.
Healey says questioning Baker’s use of the Civil Defense Act during the pandemic is “misguided.”
The AG has been at odds with the Trump administration almost from the start over the environment, student visas, the Census and more. This time, she’s arguing the same side of the issue with Trump, attaching as an exhibit the president’s declaration of a national emergency surrounding the coronavirus outbreak. Asked for comment Sunday, Healey’s office referred the Herald to the 220-page brief on file with the court.
Opponents say the Public Health Act is a better option. They argue Baker’s edicts have left Massachusetts with the nation’s highest unemployment rate — 16.1%.
The matter is set to go before the Supreme Judicial Court Sept. 11.
“After 171 days, this lawsuit has forced Governor Baker to finally put pen to paper and offer the people of Massachusetts a written, legal explanation as to why he believes he has the authority to violate their civil rights and bypass the state’s Public Health Act,” said Danielle Webb, chair of Fiscal Alliance Foundation
In defense of Baker, Healey argues the coronavirus pandemic is a textbook example of why the Civil Defense Act was put on the books.
“Like fires, floods, and earthquakes, COVID-19 is a natural phenomenon that threatens ‘the public peace, health, security and safety’ … of the people of the Commonwealth,” she adds.
Paul Craney, spokesman for the foundation, said the Founding Fathers were “well aware of pandemics” and the use of the Public Health Act was crafted for what’s unfolding today.
“The Public Health Act gives more control to cities and towns,” Craney said. “The Legislature totally took a back seat on all this.”
Craney said the point in spreading out the authority to elected officials — and not just limiting it to the governor and his staff — allows for more input from constituents. He added he’s “sympathetic” to the realities of the pandemic, but questions why the power rests in one person’s hands.
“It’s setting a horrible precedent,” Craney told the Herald. “There’s no opportunity to petition your state representative or senator. It’s just much harder to have your voice heard.”
He said Baker and his staff are trying to “micro-manage the economy” while he finds it “surprising” Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Karen Spilka have been mostly in the background.
But Healey, quoting Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers said: “The unitary executive can best respond to ‘the most critical emergencies of the state,’ whereas in the legislature, promptitude of decision is oftener an evil than a benefit.”
from Boston Herald https://ift.tt/3hH8lW8
Post a Comment