While individual states have authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to issue sweeping orders, civil rights organizations like the ACLU of Northern California are considering whether Governor Gavin Newsom’s COVID-19 shelter-in-place order is too restrictive.
Executive order N-33-20, signed by the governor on March 19 states the following: “The supply chain must continue and Californians must have access to such necessities as food, prescriptions and health care. When people need to leave their homes or places of residence, whether to obtain or perform the functions above or to otherwise facilitate authorized necessary activities, they should at all times practice social distancing.”
The order lacks a date of expiration, according to the Daily Post, and the governor specifically is allowing local officials to issue their own orders that are even stricter, which could lend itself to legal action that the ACLU says it is prepared to address.
The governor signed another executive order, N-28-20, on March 16
“We are engaged and we are ready to challenge any indefensible abuse of power,” the ACLU states in its response to the COVID-19 Crisis.
The issues the order should focus on is access to courts, public meetings and public records, according to David Snyder, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition.
“It may have problems from the perspective of what a governor is permitted to do by way of emergency executive order,” Snyder told the Northern California Record about Gov. Newsom’s order.
The ACLU's alert further states on its website that it is concerned with court closures and due process.
“We are continuing to monitor the implications of closing federal offices for those in immigration proceedings,” the ACLU alert declares. “We are monitoring the situation closely to ensure that the government-mandated 'shelter-in-place' restrictions are being enforced equitably, and that specific populations are not put in extreme risk over which they have no control.”