Civil Liberties and the Pandemic
– By Howard Sierer –
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch offers penetrating insights on the rampant civil liberties abuses that were mandated by overzealous government officials at all levels of government during the pandemic. Citizens who defended civil liberties were often shouted down for endangering public health yet now we recognize that the abuses had little or no effect on COVID’s spread.
Justice Gorsuch’s use of the word “peacetime” in the first sentence below acknowledges another gross violation of civil rights: the World War II internment of Japanese-Americans with no discernable improvement in wartime security.
“Since March 2020, we may have experienced the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country. Executive officials across the country issued emergency decrees on a breathtaking scale. Governors and local leaders imposed lockdown orders forcing people to remain in their homes. They shuttered businesses and schools, public and private. They closed churches even as they allowed casinos and other favored businesses to carry on. They threatened violators not just with civil penalties but with criminal sanctions too. They surveilled church parking lots, recorded license plates, and issued notices warning that attendance at even outdoor services satisfying all state social-distancing and hygiene requirements could amount to criminal conduct. They divided cities and neighborhoods into color-coded zones, forced individuals to fight for their freedoms in court on emergency timetables, and then changed their color-coded schemes when defeat in court seemed imminent.
“Federal executive officials entered the act too. Not just with emergency immigration decrees. They deployed a public-health agency to regulate landlord-tenant relations nationwide. They used a workplace-safety agency to issue a vaccination mandate for most working Americans. They threatened to fire noncompliant employees, and warned that service members who refused to vaccinate might face dishonorable discharge and confinement. Along the way, it seems federal officials may have pressured social-media companies to suppress information about pandemic policies with which they disagreed.
“While executive officials issued new emergency decrees at a furious pace, state legislatures and Congress—the bodies normally responsible for adopting our laws—too often fell silent. Courts bound to protect our liberties addressed a few—but hardly all—of the intrusions upon them…
“Doubtless, many lessons can be learned from this chapter in our history, and hopefully serious efforts will be made to study it. One lesson might be this: Fear and the desire for safety are powerful forces. They can lead to a clamor for action—almost any action—as long as someone does something to address a perceived threat. A leader or an expert who claims he can fix everything, if only we do exactly as he says, can prove an irresistible force. We do not need to confront a bayonet, we need only a nudge, before we willingly abandon the nicety of requiring laws to be adopted by our legislative representatives and accept rule by decree.
“Along the way, we will accede to the loss of many cherished civil liberties—the right to worship freely, to debate public policy without censorship, to gather with friends and family, or simply to leave our homes. We may even cheer on those who ask us to disregard our normal lawmaking processes and forfeit our personal freedoms. Of course, this is no new story. Even the ancients warned that democracies can degenerate toward autocracy in the face of fear.
“But maybe we have learned another lesson too. The concentration of power in the hands of so few may be efficient and sometimes popular. But it does not tend toward sound government. However wise one person or his advisors may be, that is no substitute for the wisdom of the whole of the American people that can be tapped in the legislative process. Decisions produced by those who indulge no criticism are rarely as good as those produced after robust and uncensored debate. Decisions announced on the fly are rarely as wise as those that come after careful deliberation.
“Decisions made by a few often yield unintended consequences that may be avoided when more are consulted. Autocracies have always suffered these defects… rule by indefinite emergency edict risks leaving all of us with a shell of a democracy and civil liberties just as hollow.”
Viewpoints and perspectives expressed throughout The Independent are those of the individual contributors. They do not necessarily reflect those held by the staff of The Independent or our advertising sponsors. Your comments, rebuttals, and contributions are welcome in accordance with our Terms of Service. Please be respectful and abide by our Community Rules. If you have privacy concerns you can view our Privacy Policy here. Thank you!
Click here to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or a Letter to the Editor
There are two sides to this equation, and sadly both have been decimated. What if we experience another pandemic of greater magnitude in regards to lethality and transmission where such drastic social measures would be absolutely necessary to save 50 million+ American lives? Well, the loss of trust in our institutions and government negates a proactive response at this point. Take for example the peer reviewed journal the Lancet that published absolute garbage science at the height of the pandemic that eventually had to be retracted. How many times were we lied to outright by government agencies? Yes some politicians went off the deep end and I agree with your assesments regarding liberty in the article wholeheartedly. The point I would add is this… Our country is now vulnerable and certain specific topics regarding this predicament I will leave out of this comment. I will say… WE SCREWED up – and it was a screw up at the highest levels. (No conspiracy theories here… ) Peace out…