Author Topic: If the CDC's Mask Mandate Is 'Necessary for the Public Health,' Why Didn't the DOJ Seek a Stay To Re  (Read 52 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,959
If the CDC's Mask Mandate Is 'Necessary for the Public Health,' Why Didn't the DOJ Seek a Stay To Restore It?

The Biden administration's main priority seems to be leaving the agency's authority vague enough to allow future interventions.

JACOB SULLUM
4.25.2022

After a federal judge vacated the federal mask mandate for travelers last week, the Justice Department waited two days before filing an appeal. It said an appeal was contingent on whether the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) thought the mandate "remains necessary for public health." On Wednesday evening, the CDC confirmed that, in its view, "an order requiring masking in the indoor transportation corridor remains necessary for the public health."

Yet while the Justice Department is now asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit to review U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle's ruling against the mask mandate, it did not seek a stay that would allow the CDC to reinstate this supposedly necessary edict while the case is pending. The mandate's supporters say the appeal is aimed not at restoring the mask requirement so much as upholding the CDC's lawful public health authority. The contours of that authority remain nebulous, however, and the version promoted by the agency's defenders is alarmingly broad.

"Basically, [the Biden administration] is giving up on the mask mandate," Georgetown University law professor Lawrence Gostin told The New York Times on Friday. "The administration's goal is a legal principle, which is to ensure that the CDC has strong public health powers to fight COVID and to fight future pandemics. And it appears much less important to them to quickly reinstate the mask mandate."

Gostin, who according to the Times "advised the White House on the case," elaborates on that "legal principle" in a Times opinion piece published today. "Should the federal government have the power to address broad public health emergencies?" Gostin and civil rights lawyer Duncan Hosie write. As they see it, Mizelle "effectively answered no."

*  *  *

Source:  https://reason.com/2022/04/25/if-the-cdcs-mask-mandate-is-necessary-for-the-public-health-why-didnt-the-doj-seek-a-stay-to-restore-it/