Why are we questioning whether our Constitution has
been violated?

What's more important - saving lives or supposedly
violating our Constitution?

We need people to obey the laws in order to stop the
spread of COVID-19.

So taking action with laws that
are fair, necessary and have been properly and
democratically scrutinised is a key element in dealing
with the pandemic.

Rather than looking at the rule of law as a burden on the
ability of the government to deal with the pandemic, we
should be seeing it as a way of maintaining public
confidence in the goverment and the compliance with the
laws as the only way that the pandemic will be contained.

It's not brain surgery. But it is a means of saving lives.

Joe,

You want to compare us with other countries. How about Vietnam: 323 cases, NO deaths. NO lockdown.

Ttbn,

Wow, thanks - just a bit better than the US with 120,000 deaths so far.

What do you think that Vietnam is doing right that the US is doing so dreadfully wrong ? Wearing masks ? Social distancing ? Going out only when it's really necessary ? i.e. a de facto lock-down ? Are they out of it already ?

So what can the US learn from Vietnam before another 120,000 die needlessly ?

Cheers,

Joe

The crux of the matter is that in NSW & Victoria I believe a
"State of Emergency" has been declared.
When applied the Minister in charge of emergencies and the senior
police officer in any district is god.
He says jump you say how high.
There are no exceptions. If he says stay in your house you stay.
If not, you will be arrested.
There was one occasion where I had to threaten someone that if they
did not do as I requested I would take it to the Police commander
and he would send someone around to convince them.
They did as requested.
A State of Emergency does have powers that overide the constitution
and the normal legal protections.

Bazz: "A State of Emergency does have powers that overide the constitution and the normal legal protections."

Nothing overrides the National Constitution!

A state can only enact laws consistent with the constitution, none-the-less the states have incredibly vast powers. So much power that they can create laws that many would say/feel are very oppressive and harsh.

For example, they could theoretically pass a law that punishes minor car speeding with life imprisonment. The federal constitution allows this since it leaves the regulation of roads to the states (provided that the Federal Government hasn't signed an international treaty that it would contravene).

Bazz,

Are you constitutional lawyer? David David Flint is, and tells a different story.