Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Ok, so forgive future typos as i'm doing this from the phone and it struck me to ask...

 

If i'm understanding correctly, based on the Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242), no one has to quarantine or keep their business closed. Any executive order, peace-time or otherwise, cannot violate ANY constitutional right. 

 

IF i understand correctly (and I really hope there are some lawyers and law enforcement officers who can help me if I don't properly comprehend), Law Enforcement shouldn't enforce said executive orders, and if they did, not only would it be "thrown out of court", but the person signing the executive order AND anyone who enforces it, could be held liable and could potentially face jailtime.

 

Help me out here, folks.

Edited by artichoku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is what it should be, and what it is...

 

What you describe is what it should be.

However reality is different.   The right to keep and bear arms is infringed by almost every state, every day, yet no court will find that those infringements are depravations of civil rights.

Many state and local governments are getting around that pesky constitution by closing business under health regulations... lets face it, if the courts allow a city to condemn a property and declare it unfit for habitation (folks trying to live off grid) then shutting down a business for public health reasons will easily be allowed.     I don't think you will have a court that will find much differently.   The few successful applications of 18 USC 242, and 42 USC 1983 usually involve a crooked cop that so blatently abused his powers that it just couldn't be ignored.

 

Here is a link with typical 42 USC 1983 claims (similar to 18 USC 242), and how the courts very narrowly defined what constituted a violation:

https://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/typical-section-1983-claims.html

 

Das.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
10 hours ago, DasBlinkenlight said:

There is what it should be, and what it is...

 

What you describe is what it should be.

However reality is different.   The right to keep and bear arms is infringed by almost every state, every day, yet no court will find that those infringements are depravations of civil rights.

Many state and local governments are getting around that pesky constitution by closing business under health regulations... lets face it, if the courts allow a city to condemn a property and declare it unfit for habitation (folks trying to live off grid) then shutting down a business for public health reasons will easily be allowed.     I don't think you will have a court that will find much differently.   The few successful applications of 18 USC 242, and 42 USC 1983 usually involve a crooked cop that so blatently abused his powers that it just couldn't be ignored.

 

Here is a link with typical 42 USC 1983 claims (similar to 18 USC 242), and how the courts very narrowly defined what constituted a violation:

https://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/typical-section-1983-claims.html

 

Das.

that really stinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Who Viewed the Topic

    6 members have viewed this topic:

×
×
  • Create New...