The Japanese internments were not considered by the courts until after the war and after the fact. Many of the U.S. governments actions during WW2 were just accepted during the war but were found to be unconstitutional after was when finally reviewed by the courts.
The constitution says the U.S. Congress controls interstate commerce and the states cannot interfere with it. By imposing restrictions such as quarantines and limits, the states are interfering with interstate commerce. To date, the few cases filed against these types of actions have been squashed by state courts and lower level federal courts without higher court reviews. They have mostly only been filed at local levels without big corporations or organizations participating mostly because they are afraid of the cancel culture backlash by government panicked consumers resulting in boycotts of their products. When life is back to normal for a few years and things have calmed down, I believe there will be lawsuits seeking injunctions against these ever happening again and even seeking damages for lost business. It will eventually end up at the Supreme Court and I am positive it will all be ruled unconstitutional.
My argument is that things like quarantines, lockdowns and restrictions on businesses (especially those operating interstate) were unconstitutional and therefore illegal. But that will be conveniently ignored by the federal, state and local governments until long after they are done. They should never have happened or been allowed.
None of this was legal, proper or should have been allowed to happen no matter the magnitude of the crisis unless the U.S. Congress passed a law putting the restrictions and quarantines in place. (Just to be clear, I'm talking blank quarantines, not quadrating sick people on an individual basis).
I'm also a believer in less government control and regulation of our lives. It is an individuals choice and responsibility to the level of risk they are willing to accept, and the consequences of their actions should only lay on themselves.
en.m.wikipedia.org
I’m not an expert on this topic by any means but that reads to me as a challenge to the internments, going from 1942-1944, upheld by the Supreme Court, 6-3. Which would also have it taking place well after the 442nd RCT had been engaged against the Nazis in the ETO.
Again, I don’t disagree exactly that it’s Congress role in that as regulating interstate commerce. That’s fine by me. My take on COVID has always been as a dress rehearsal for something that will actually be truly disastrous to society, kill way more people, kids, young and healthy workers, etc.
If your AAR out of this is that the process followed was not correct and that the proper way to do things is for Congress to do that for “the next one” then I’m all for it. If anything, I think doing the initial restrictions at a Federal level coordinating across all states, and controlling the international borders was necessary to make a lockdown attempt as short as possible and effective. It was bizarre that wealthy people in NYC at the height of the pandemic could just go to their vacation homes when the city was trying to go into lockdown.
I do in principle agree with individual rights for self determination but I disagree with it when I have to rely on the medical risk assessment ability of other individuals with preventing the spread of say, an airborne version of Ebola, instead of COVID. So...yeah, COVID doesn’t cross that personal line for me, but super Ebola would.
