Yeah, so good point. Her cockameme-mee ban does not outweigh federal dress-codes or uniform rules. ICE is gunna ICE - no standing for her.
Furthermore, it doesn't outweigh the right of the public to wear what they like, bar decency laws, such as not appearing naked in public. Even that is tolerated to some extent - refer to streakers on a football pitch - they get arrested for a short time, and then charged a fine in court - it's an infingement. A ban on clothing or face-wear, however, infirnges on human rights when in public - (so you can't enter a bank with a mask on, the bank will advertsie that at the door). However, there are no 'must taking off clothes' in public laws - not only on the basis of privacy as is in this case. What if the person wants or needs to wear a mask because of IDK, a dental issue, or a cold? Also, there are no anti-hijab laws in the USA for the same reason. If someone wants to walk around inside a tent, let them. I mean we were all told to wear masks before, so ... her ban infringes on that human right, and is confusing to boot.
and bureaucratically - How will she enforce it? Any fines and arrests for infirngement set in the legislation? I didn't think so. It wouldn't pass a legal review. Maybe she is hoping for her 15 minutes of fame in the Supreme Court? Wouldn't even get past the Appeals circuit.
She has nothing! Agree that a ban for citizens would be useless and unenforceable - and I am not a proponent but the DC ban specifically was during acts of civil unrest and things like that but Covid opened up grand opportunities for criminals.
For legislators contemplating 'clothing bans' or 'mask enforcements' they are screwed either way. Like I said before: Bar decency laws, there really is no constitutional basis to demand any form of dress-code in public.
Yeah, so good point. Her cockameme-mee ban does not outweigh federal dress-codes or uniform rules. ICE is gunna ICE - no standing for her.
Furthermore, it doesn't outweigh the right of the public to wear what they like, bar decency laws, such as not appearing naked in public. Even that is tolerated to some extent - refer to streakers on a football pitch - they get arrested for a short time, and then charged a fine in court - it's an infingement. A ban on clothing or face-wear, however, infirnges on human rights when in public - (so you can't enter a bank with a mask on, the bank will advertsie that at the door). However, there are no 'must taking off clothes' in public laws - not only on the basis of privacy as is in this case. What if the person wants or needs to wear a mask because of IDK, a dental issue, or a cold? Also, there are no anti-hijab laws in the USA for the same reason. If someone wants to walk around inside a tent, let them. I mean we were all told to wear masks before, so ... her ban infringes on that human right, and is confusing to boot.
and bureaucratically - How will she enforce it? Any fines and arrests for infirngement set in the legislation? I didn't think so. It wouldn't pass a legal review. Maybe she is hoping for her 15 minutes of fame in the Supreme Court? Wouldn't even get past the Appeals circuit.
She has nothing! Agree that a ban for citizens would be useless and unenforceable - and I am not a proponent but the DC ban specifically was during acts of civil unrest and things like that but Covid opened up grand opportunities for criminals.
For legislators contemplating 'clothing bans' or 'mask enforcements' they are screwed either way. Like I said before: Bar decency laws, there really is no constitutional basis to demand any form of dress-code in public.
But totalitarians will totalitarianize.