Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

* UPDATED x1 * Read Rep. Cabello’s lawsuit against the governor’s EO

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

* As we discussed yesterday, Rep. John Cabello R-Machesney Park) has filed a lawsuit attempting to void the governor’s executive order. Here are some of the relevant portions…

A. Entering an order declaring the Illinois Legislature specifically delegated the supreme power of isolation and quarantine of its citizens to the Illinois Department of Public Health. Pritzker has no legal authority under the Illinois Constitution to enter isolation or quarantine of Cabello, or any citizen of the State of Illinois similarly situated;

B. Enter an order declaring that Section 1 of the March 20 Executive Order, or any subsequent order issued by Pritzker with substantively the same provision as Section 1 of the March 20 Executive Order, requiring Cabello, and all other citizens similarly situated, to “stay in place” be found void ab initio;

C. Awarding the Plaintiff his costs incurred in this matter as may be allowed by law;

D. That the Court grant such other and further relief as is just and proper. […]

A. Entering an order declaring Pritzker declared the COVID-19 pandemic a state-wide disaster on March 09, 2019;

B. Entering an order declaring there has at all times relevant only been one disaster, that being COVID-19.

C. Entering an order declaring the April 01 Proclamation was acknowledging the same COVID-19 disaster which was declared on March 09, 2020.

D. Entering an order declaring the emergency powers granted Pritzker as a result of the March 09 Proclamation lapsed on April 08, 2020;

E. Entering an order declaring the emergency powers of section 7 of the IEMAA in March 20 Executive Order lapsed at the end of April 07, 2020 on their own terms;

F. Entering a declaring that Pritzker’s April 01 Executive Order, extending the effective date of his March 20 Executive Order until April 30, 2020, as it relates to the exercise of emergency powers of section 7 of the IEMAA, was in excess of the authority granted him under IEMAA;

G. Enter an order declaring that any further exercise by Pritzker of the emergency powers enumerated within section 7 of the IEMAA, attempting to be enforced subsequent to April 08, 2020 are void ab initio; […]

A) Entering an order finding Section 1 of the March 20 Executive Order is void as it violates the procedural due process rights of Cabello, and all citizens similarly situated;

B) Entering an order finding Section 1 of the March 20 Executive Order is void as it violates the substantive due process rights of Cabello, and all citizens similarly situated;

C) Entering an order that any subsequent orders issued by Pritzker with substantively the same provision of Section 1 of the March 20 Executive Order is void ab initio; […]

A. Finding that Cabello, and all citizens similarly situated have a right, to insist from Pritzker that Section 1 of his March 20 Executive Order, or any subsequent order issued with substantively the same restrictions, must have been issued within any authority delegated by the legislature or from any authority granted him from the Constitution, and ; and

B. Finding that Cabello, and all citizens similarly situated have a right, to insist form Pritzker that Section 1 of his March 20 Executive Order, any subsequent order issued with substantively the same restrictions, must still be valid and not have lapsed by the express language of the IMEAA;

Void ab initio means “to be treated as invalid from the outset.” And I still say that the EO does not command anyone to be isolated or quarantined.

* And then he asks for an injunction…

Enter an injunction permanently enjoining Pritzker, or anyone under his authority, from enforcing the March 20 Executive Order, any subsequent order issued with substantively the same restrictions, against Cabello, and all citizens similarly situated, from this date forward.

Enter an injunction permanently enjoining Pritzker from entering any further executive orders against Cabello, and all citizens similarly situated, from restricting their freedom of movement to leave their homes and further restricted the activities they might engage within the entire State of Illinois.

*** UPDATE *** Jordan Abudayyeh…

This callous disregard for science, reason, and the value of human life will be settled by the courts. The governor is focused on the statewide response to COVID-19, an effort that is not just legal, but is keeping people safe and saving lives.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:11 am

Comments

Who has been restricted from leaving their homes? How can you grant relief for something that isn’t happening?

Cabello is a joke. Baily is a joke. And anyone who supports this nonsense is a joke.

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:17 am
I could easily see a number of House members sponsoring a resolution to censure Rep. Cabello for his publicity stunt. Would be interesting to see how suburban GOP members vote on that…

Comment by cover Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:17 am
Daycares need to be reopened. My child’s doctor believes this lockdown is needlessly causing many mental health issues for young children who at virtually zero risk of contracting and carrying the virus. Not to mention all the children who are now foregoing regular vaccine schedules because parents are afraid to venture out to the doctors office.

Comment by Mitchell P Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:18 am
We are all in the same boat here: you move, you get infected. You stay home, you have a good chance of weathering the pandemic out.

Comment by Tomacci Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:18 am
2 more reasons why the House Republicans are a joke ABA will forever be a minority party lacking brains and ideas

Comment by Wow Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:18 am
=== who at virtually zero risk of contracting and carrying the virus.===

What is the name of this doctor?

I need to know what physician thinks this nonsense.

Thanks.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:19 am
- cover -

I’d go a step further and have a resolution, and ask for a roll call, in support of the governors Stay at Home order.

I’d like to see Leader Durkin “red” on that…

… or Mr. Cabello, Ms. Bourne, Ms. Bryant, Mr. Bailey…

Be “red” on the “Stay at Home” support…

Explain that NPR’s 3/1, 4/1 ratio supporting these steps… nope, we’re against that.

Call the legislature back, run the resolution.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:23 am
Um, Mitchell P. Children can carry the virus. So, you may have them carry the virus into the day care. Infect people there - adults and children alike - who will then carry that virus back to their houses. And those people will then carry that virus out in the public as they go out and about shoppping and such.

Who exactly is this doctor? I think I would be finding a new doctor if your doctor doesn’t understand anything about this virus.

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:23 am
This case and this broader legal argument is not just about isolation and quarantine in their narrow interpretations, but also about the powers of the state to ban a private business from operating. That executive power not only defines which businesses are essential on its own, it also orders them to close on the power of the executive branch on its own. That action deprives a person of their natural right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. The Constitution’s 5th Amendment restrains the government from any action that deprives an individual “of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Scientists and doctors should still make their case. Public health experts should still caution people about safe practices. The government should still do what it can to inform and protect people, and should offer support to hospitals and clinicians. But no governor can unilaterally rob a person of their individual rights under the law without the consent of the governed. No public health crisis is worth trashing our entire system of government.

Comment by Da Lobsta Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:25 am
Is he receiving staff support for this from the caucus staff?

Comment by Just Me 2 Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:26 am
==My child’s doctor believes this lockdown is needlessly causing many mental health issues for young children who at virtually zero risk of contracting and carrying the virus.==

Can you back that statement about kids being zero risk for contracting and carrying the virus up with any facts or studies? I find this to be highly suspect, and coming from a doctor. I didn’t think that viruses get to pick and choose what host they infect and who in turn can carry it, even if they are an asymptomatic carrier. And heaven forbid parents actually have to be an active player in and guardian of protecting their own child’s mental health. Of all the things to complain about today. Oi vey.

Comment by EssentialWorkingMom Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:28 am
==No public health crisis is worth trashing our entire system of government.==

Really? So you believe the government should have absolutely no power to fight a pandemic? So how would you go about fighting something of this magnitude Mr. Wizard?

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:29 am
I don’t know that Winnebago County is going to be as friendly to this as the previous one was.

Comment by PrairieChicken Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:33 am
This suit, like the Bailey suit, won’t be fully understood or completely adjudicated until every and all appeals are exhausted, by both sides.

It’s quite interesting to the comic element reading this, from the same legislator who had a whole bill designed to make legislators wear body cameras at work… this is that same legislator here.

It’s not quite a self trolling, but…

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:33 am
Demoralized has it right. The children who contract the virus rarely get seriously sick themselves. Being asymptomatic they unknowingly are carriers who spread the virus to adults who are more vulnerable.

Comment by The Dude Abides Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:36 am
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/28/children-10-can-hug-grandparents-without-risk-swiss-health-officials/

Comment by MItchell P Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:36 am
==Really? So you believe the government should have absolutely no power to fight a pandemic? So how would you go about fighting something of this magnitude Mr. Wizard?==

This would be a start, maintaining due process etc..:
http://www.idph.state.il.us/pandemic_flu/Illinois_Pandemic_Flu_Plan.pdf

Comment by essentially working Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:36 am
Demoralized- You fight it the Democratic way not by executive fiat. We give the Governor limited power to act in an emergency. During those 30 days the GA should convene, debate and vote on the plan going forward working with the Executive branch. Then the courts have their role if called upon. We don’t abandon our constitutional processes because there is a crisis.

Comment by Hippo Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:37 am
Amazing how this vocal super-minority entirely consists of people who can *remain in their homes as long as they want*. Cabello wants the freedom to have less fortunate people dragged into work so he can patronize their shops at his convenience, then go back to his cushy home. What a brave stand.

Comment by PJ Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:39 am
From that Swiss link..,

===Children are very rarely infected===

… doesn’t say they can’t be infected.

That was Swiss’ NIH Director.

What’s that doctor’s name you have … can you share?

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:39 am
===What is the name of this doctor?===

My money is on Oz, Phil, or Drew.

On a serious note, OW, we should give the benefit of doubt to this physician if they are not imaginary. Their child’s physician might have said something completely different from what they heard and understood. I watch my parents do it all the time — and they’re well intentioned and serious about following their physicians advice.

Comment by Candy Dogood Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:43 am
==You fight it the Democratic way not by executive fiat.==

By all means lets govern by committee in a disaster. Some of you are absolutely unbelievable and completely and utterly fail to grasp any of what is going on. It amazes me the levl of incompetence some of you show.

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:43 am
I didn’t mean to state that no children can get the virus. Of course there is a possibility, but it remains small. The fact is that many European countries are imminently reopening schools. Not sure why we aren’t even considering the possibility.

Comment by MItchell P Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:45 am
Did Cabby ask for a olive or twist with this one?
Suprised the ShelteredMedia did not ask today’s GOPie side show if they supported Gomer & Cabby legal action or were a “no” on renewing/extending JB EO? Simple question

Comment by Annonin Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:48 am
Demoralized- it’s amazing the level of ignorance you show. We don’t have a king. We don’t have a General. We have a republican from of government. There is no reason not to convene the GA to do their job. This crisis will last a long time. They don’t get a pass. They need to debate the appropriate solution that reflects the will of the people and passes constitutional muster.

Comment by Hippo Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:48 am
===Not sure why we aren’t even considering the possibility===

You’re not sure or are you just willfully ignorant?

The White House guidance says schools shouldn’t open until Phase 2 and we aren’t even to Phase 1 yet.

In order to get to Phase 1, we need 14 days of consistent decreases of the case numbers, etc. To get to Phase 2, we need another two weeks of consistent drops in numbers. https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/4/17/21225830/illinois-cannot-walk-until-it-crawls-in-beating-covid-19-but-on-testing-were-still-crawling

Sheesh, man, pay attention or get off this blog.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:48 am
Nobody has been ordered into isolation or quarantine. I’m sure words like that resonate with the Facebook crowd and get a lot of “likes” (which I think is what they’re really after). But they are nowhere to be found in any of the actual EOs. Perhaps this is as simple as having the courts read the EO to Cabello, Bailey and their common lawyer so it’s clearly understood that they have never been isolated or quarantined. And then once that’s done fine the lot of them for good measure.

Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:48 am
===They need to debate the appropriate solution that reflects the will of the people and passes constitutional muster===

Right now, they choose not to. Right or wrong, that’s a decision.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:50 am
==that reflects the will of the people==

You think a response to a crisis should represent the “will of the people?” lol. Great plan. I’m glad you aren’t in charge.

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:51 am
===C. Awarding the Plaintiff his costs incurred in this matter as may be allowed by law;===

So is it safe to assume ILGOP does not support the Senate’s goal for liability reform? I’m not sure how the state could be liable for damages while at the same time you can grant businesses freedom to operate without liability.

Comment by njt Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:51 am
Rich. It’s not a decision, it’s an abdication of their duties.

Comment by Hippo Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:53 am
==to enter isolation or quarantine==

Last I checked, Cabello’s isolation was self-imposed. What activity has he been forbidden from taking part in?

Comment by Jocko Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:56 am
=They need to debate the appropriate solution that reflects the will of the people and passes constitutional muster.=

Perhaps they could ask the GA to pass a bill adopting the federal guidelines for reopening as promulgated by the President? It would be interesting to see Bailey and Cabello navigate through that.

Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:56 am
=== who at virtually zero risk of contracting===

That’s what you indeed wrote.

Exposing your child to a virus is a choice… not what Dr. Fauci or the White House thinks, but it is a choice.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:57 am
“They need to debate the appropriate solution that reflects the will of the people”

Pretty sure the consensus is that the COVID-19 virus should stop infecting humans.

Sadly, the virus doesn’t seem to give a damn about “the will of the people.”

– MrJM

Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 11:58 am
=My child’s doctor believes this lockdown is =

I was talking to my doctor and he said your doctor is a quack. Children have in fact been infected and died from COVID-19. That is documented.

The emergence of the civil liberties argument is absurd. The constitution does not guarantee as right going to a bar or restaurant. If you read that into the constitution you can’t read.

These are the same people that are ok with civil forfeiture etc.

In addition, these actions by governors, unless prohibited by their state constitutions, are clearly laid out in the constitution as rights left to the states.

These legislators are like petulant children who cannot take no for an answer. The same people are blindly following a president and his cronies that violate the constitution with regularity. Hypocrites.

Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:00 pm
@Rich Miller:

“I still say that the EO does not command anyone to be isolated or quarantined.”

I believe that this statement is correct in terms of the verbiage, but actually implementation of the Executive Orders have been different in some localities — there is no uniformity. Much of it depends upon the local police departments and if the government determines that you are an essential worker or engaged in permitted activities.

In some places, the police have stopped people and questioned them as to why they were out of doors. In certain Chicago neighborhoods, checkpoints have bee put in place to stop people seeking to congregate out of doors.
Some members of the media have been issued passes allowing them to travel to and from work.

Stay safe everyone.

Comment by Practical Politics Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:01 pm
@misterjayem

Thank you. You are infinitely better at responding to nonsense than anyone else.

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:01 pm
Those IGOPers really need to read the IDPH “Pandemic Influenza Preparedness and Response Plan”.

“… The Illinois Pandemic Preparedness and Response Plan, as with all state emergency response plans, operates within the framework of the Illinois Emergency Operations Plan. Moreover, the Illinois Pandemic Preparedness and Response Plan is intended to work in concert with several other plans that will be implemented during a pandemic to guide various aspects of the response, …

The overall direction and control authority reside with the Office of the Governor,
with coordination and management expertise supplied by the Illinois Emergency
Management Agency (IEMA). …”

Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:04 pm
Anonymous at 11:59 was me.

Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:10 pm
I definitely like this part of the IDPH Pandemic Flu Plan:

“IDPH shall investigate the causes of dangerously contagious or infectious diseases,
especially when existing in epidemic form, and take means to restrict and suppress
the same. Whenever such disease becomes, or threatens to become epidemic in any
locality, and the local board of health or local authorities neglect or refuse to
enforce efficient measures for its restriction or suppression or to act with sufficient
promptness or efficiency, or whenever the local board of health or local
authorities neglect or refuse to promptly enforce efficient measures for the
restriction or suppression of dangerously contagious or infectious diseases, IDPH
may enforce such measures as it deems necessary to protect the public health,
and all necessary expenses so incurred shall be paid by the locality for which services
are rendered.”

As I read this, the state could not only enforce the social distancing plan, it could make the locals pay when their own authorities won’t do it.

Comment by cover Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:15 pm
I find it amusing that some of you are suggesting that be legislated like a tax or a new law. That’s not how diseases work, at all. Also, the will of the people put the Rebuplican Party in this state into super minority status. The people spoke, sorry some of you don’t like what they had to tell you.

Comment by Fixer Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:26 pm
Mitchell P, I’d be very leery of leaning on Swedish quotes if I were you. They’ve stayed fully open during this, and they keep claiming that they’ve got everything under control, but the numbers prove them wrong. They have more than twice the number of cases than Denmark, Finland and Norway have and have more deaths than all three nations COMBINED. If that’s success, we really don’t want to see what failure looks like.

Sweden, and Georgia to some extent, are test cases in this debate. So far Sweden hasn’t done well, we’ll have to wait a couple weeks to see what happens in Georgia

Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:28 pm
==I could easily see a number of House members sponsoring a resolution to censure Rep. Cabello for his publicity stunt.=

I’d still like to see Bailey and his cohorts censured for illegally entering a closed state park to broadcast the “common Sense Tour”. Pretty sure if I drove around the gates to film a piece about the park closures from inside the park I’d be staring at a trespassing ticket for that kind of stunt.

Comment by DownSouth Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:42 pm
Looks like my anonymous post at 11:59 got sent to isolation. So here it is again.

Those of you who think that the covid19 symptoms in children are non-life threatening , really need to read this article:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/29/health/rare-inflammatory-syndrome-us-covid-19/index.html

Any doctor who minimizes this disease ought to be dropped like a hot rock. You need to be looking for another family physician.

Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:47 pm
If this issue is really about restrictions on trade, or commerce, as Lobsta argues, then someone owning a business which has been harmed by the EO would have had standing. Not these guys. That would be an interesting, but different case.

Since Cabello and Bailey, and others “in similar situations” have not actually been “quarantined” or even significantly harmed by the EO, most of their complaint is nonsense on its face. They are apparently presuming to represent others who, unlike themselves, might actually have been harmed in some ways. We shall see what another court thinks of this.

Comment by walker Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:50 pm
So will the anti abortion people demand Cabello be prosecuted for murder if he succeeds and the hospitals are overwhelmed causing increased death rates?

Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:51 pm
The “do what ever you want” crowd loves to cite “life, liberty, or property.” They love the liberty part, but they sure don’t care about the life part. I don’t care what they do with their lives, I do care what their irresponsible actions in the name of “liberty” do to mine, and my family and friends.

Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 12:57 pm
I laugh at the argument that an emergency proclamation is not limited, but the Gov’s ability to respond lasts only 30 days.

Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:00 pm
@Walker:

You may have a point, but it depends upon the presiding judge. The Clay County judge had no issue with Bailey’s standing.

The Wickard v. Filburn precedent created a fairly broad definition of what constitutes commerce. Almost any activity impacts upon commerce.

Since the General Assembly has not held a session since early March, legislators who rent apartments may have been impacted indirectly. Hotel rooms may be a stretch, but who really knows.

I was surprised by the TRO entered in Bailey’s case.

Comment by Practical Politics Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:03 pm
It appears it may be time to simply pull any and all state funds, prisons or state operated centers from Woodford County since they have decided they make the rules. Don’t like how the gov is running things, fine, give up every drop of state revenue spent in your county.

Comment by Give Me A Break Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:19 pm
I find it unsettling that any governor can declare and extend an emergency with no legislative check. While I think JB has done a good job, I would like the legislature to officially authorize the governor to extend the emergency.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:19 pm
= no legislative check =

The GA‘s appropriation and investigative powers remain intact. What you are calling for is something like a “vote of confidence” more like what we see in parliamentary democracies. I am also concerned that having the GA vote on the lawfulness of pandemic response measures violates the separation of powers.

Comment by Not a Superstar Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:44 pm
We have no real idea of how many children are infected. Testing is largely biased towards those showing significant symptoms and so, as it seems, it is milder in children *on average* we don’t know what percent are infected or are spreading the virus.

Comment by ArchPundit Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:47 pm
The GA could simply rescind the powers of the Governor’s ability to unilaterally declare or issue multiple declarations so there is an action they could take. I would disagree with it, but it’s within the power of the legislature. I have no problem with the legislature weighing in as LBM suggests and it probably would add to the legitimacy of the orders over time. As we progress through opening up, it’s going to take several months and having legislative support would only be a good thing.

Comment by ArchPundit Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:51 pm
I need a point of clarification.

A democratically elected Legislature created this magical disaster preparedness plan and housed it in the IDPH. Isn’t the Department of Public Health part of the executive branch? Isn’t the executive branch headed by the Governor?

Are they arguing that the Governor doesn’t have the authority to implement things his own agencies are charged to implement?

Comment by Sideline Watcher Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:54 pm
Not a lawyer so i’m asking (without all the ballyhoo) How long does the governor have the consitutional authority under the emergency managemnet act to continue to lock things down and what are the repercussions for a business/owner that opens without “permission” Not any business that is state regulated( like a bar ) if there is such a thing? Is enforcement a local decision ?

Comment by NorthsideNoMore Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 1:55 pm
===Are they arguing that the Governor doesn’t have the authority to implement things his own agencies are charged to implement?

Yep.

== How long does the governor have the consitutional authority under the emergency managemnet act to continue to lock things down

He has 30 days at a proclamation. In theory, he could do this forever, but, of course, there are both legislative and judicial checks. The legislature can rescind his power through law and the judiciary could rule that the conditions are not present for an emergency. We are no where near having the courts do that despite the one judge.

Any business is state regulated–even local regulations are as sub-units of the state. The last question is one that is interesting–as I understand it the enforcement power is primarily invested in IDPH though police have ability to act. I’d be curious to hear more on that.

Comment by ArchPundit Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 2:07 pm
“They have more than twice the number of cases than Denmark, Finland and Norway have and have more deaths than all three nations COMBINED. If that’s success, we really don’t want to see what failure looks like.”

Sweden hasn’t remained fully open. The restaurants, for example, have to operate at lower capacity to enforce social distancing. And we’ve seen that, even with comparatively limited restrictions, Swedes are eating out and using public transit less than before.

As far as success… That is actually a fairly interesting question. Per BBC News, Sweden’s number of COVID-19 deaths has been plateauing (but not, as it is worth noting, declining), which puts it in similar position as United States and UK, but not many of the European countries. As far as infections, per John Hopkins reports of daily infections, Sweden’s numbers seem to be doing this interesting zip-zag, going up and then back down and then back up, while not rising all that much. By contrast, Norway and Denmark are showing clear declines in daily cases. Finland also seem to be trending toward a slow drop in daily cases.

Now, as far as the number of deaths overall, it depends on who you compare it to. To account for the fact that different countries have different populations, I took the percentage of the number of deaths (as per most recent John Hopkins report) to each country’s overall population (as of 2019). By that metric, Sweden is doing worse than Denmark, Finland, Norway and even Germany, but better than France, Italy and Spain.

My personal inclination is that, so far, fatalities can be reduced even with looser lockdown measures - but we are still left with an uncomfortable question of whether Sweden could have achieved similar results with fewer deaths if they implemented restrictions more akin to their Nordic neighbors. If one measures the success as reducing deaths, Sweden may have accomplished it (I say “may” because things can and have changed rapidly with COVID-19, and we have no idea what happens with the death rates text week). If you measure the success as trying to reduce the number of deaths and hospitalizations as much as possible, then Sweden clearly hasn’t succeeded. And the jury is still out on the whole herd immunity thing, given the increasing evidence that surviving the infection doesn’t necessarily confer immunity. If it does work, people may look at Swedeen’s high infection rates more kindly. If it doesn’t, then Swedish governments would have endangered people’s lives for nothing.

If you are thinking “that doens’t sound like this person is disagreeing with me,” I’m not. I’m just trying not to be one of those commenters who simply shouts tlaking points.

Comment by Strannik Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 2:24 pm
==No public health crisis is worth trashing our entire system of government.==

Why do people continue to view government as some benign institution that is egalitarian and empathic in nature? The government will do what it needs to do to stay in existence. The breakdown of society will collapse it. Get enough people to be sick and overwhelm the system has more of a potential to collapse the state than some short sighted protesters. Follow the order, things get better, we have long term success. We go back to normal. Keep up these dumb lawsuits and go out, this gets worse and people don’t get to go back to school, stay out of work longer, and the whole system moves towards collapse. You will then get to see how kind government is at that point. It is not even the current government you need to fear, but the crazies that fight for control later on. Stay home, stay healthy, be patient.

Comment by Friend of the Family Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 2:43 pm
@Lester Holt’s Mustache…the link was to a Swiss study, not Swedish.

Comment by Stu Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 3:53 pm
Strannik - thank you for the thoughtful reply. As we have both read the Johns Hopkins report, I think we can both agree that they haven’t been nearly as successful at preventing deaths as some media organizations claim.

Stu - yes, I’m aware, but this commenter (and others) has been leaning on the Sweden experiment quite a bit over the last several days here. See the Johns Hopkins report mentioned above for further details, but the numbers just don’t support the conservative media narrative that it has been wildly successful. I hope that results from Georgia and Texas will be different with their reopenings

Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Wednesday, Apr 29, 20 @ 4:16 pm