Jump to content

JB backs down, withdrawing emergency rules


Dave D

Recommended Posts

The General Assembly has now returned to its operations for the first time since March, and in consultation with leadership in the statehouse, my administration has decided to withdraw this rule in order to pursue legislation with the same intended mechanism in a phased manner in line with the Restore Illinois plan.

 

Enacting this measure through legislation will allow us to have these tools through our the Restore Illinois plan versus an emergency rule that would be withdrawn and rewritten at the start of phase three and then phase four. I’m here today with Illinois State Police director Brendan Kelly as well as Leader Bill Cunningham, who is sponsoring this legislation. I urge the General Assembly to take up and pass this legislation this week. Given the importance of what we are trying to do here, we will look to file an additional rule if legislation does not occur.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The General Assembly has now returned to its operations for the first time since March, and in consultation with leadership in the statehouse, my administration has decided to withdraw this rule in order to pursue legislation with the same intended mechanism in a phased manner in line with the Restore Illinois plan.

 

Enacting this measure through legislation will allow us to have these tools through our the Restore Illinois plan versus an emergency rule that would be withdrawn and rewritten at the start of phase three and then phase four. I’m here today with Illinois State Police director Brendan Kelly as well as Leader Bill Cunningham, who is sponsoring this legislation. I urge the General Assembly to take up and pass this legislation this week. Given the importance of what we are trying to do here, we will look to file an additional rule if legislation does not occur.

 

 

 

Hmmmm. He didn't know the ILGA was coming back this week, when he issued the rule last week? That's curious, given that the General Assembly's return today was reported on this site May 13, a week ago today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Section C says he, Health department needs a court order to shutdown business?

 

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=330&ChapterID=5

 

I copied it and pasted it and broke it down sentence by sentence.

 

© Except as provided in this Section, no person or a group of persons may be ordered to be quarantined or isolated and no place may be ordered to be closed and made off limits to the public except with the consent of the person or owner of the place or upon the prior order of a court of competent jurisdiction.

 

The Department may, however, order a person or a group of persons to be quarantined or isolated or may order a place to be closed and made off limits to the public on an immediate basis without prior consent or court order if, in the reasonable judgment of the Department, immediate action is required to protect the public from a dangerously contagious or infectious disease.

 

In the event of an immediate order issued without prior consent or court order, the Department shall, as soon as practical, within 48 hours after issuing the order, obtain the consent of the person or owner or file a petition requesting a court order authorizing the isolation or quarantine or closure.

 

When exigent circumstances exist that cause the court system to be unavailable or that make it impossible to obtain consent or file a petition within 48 hours after issuance of an immediate order, the Department must obtain consent or file a petition requesting a court order as soon as reasonably possible.

 

To obtain a court order, the Department, by clear and convincing evidence, must prove that the public's health and welfare are significantly endangered by a person or group of persons that has, that is suspected of having, that has been exposed to, or that is reasonably believed to have been exposed to a dangerously contagious or infectious disease including non-compliant tuberculosis patients or by a place where there is a significant amount of activity likely to spread a dangerously contagious or infectious disease.

 

The Department must also prove that all other reasonable means of correcting the problem have been exhausted and no less restrictive alternative exists.

 

For purposes of this subsection, in determining whether no less restrictive alternative exists, the court shall consider evidence showing that, under the circumstances presented by the case in which an order is sought, quarantine or isolation is the measure provided for in a rule of the Department or in guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the World Health Organization.

 

Persons who are or are about to be ordered to be isolated or quarantined and owners of places that are or are about to be closed and made off limits to the public shall have the right to counsel.

 

If a person or owner is indigent, the court shall appoint counsel for that person or owner.

 

Persons who are ordered to be isolated or quarantined or who are owners of places that are ordered to be closed and made off limits to the public, shall be given a written notice of such order.

 

The written notice shall additionally include the following: (1) notice of the right to counsel; (2) notice that if the person or owner is indigent, the court will appoint counsel for that person or owner; (3) notice of the reason for the order for isolation, quarantine, or closure; (4) notice of whether the order is an immediate order, and if so, the time frame for the Department to seek consent or to file a petition requesting a court order as set out in this subsection; and (5) notice of the anticipated duration of the isolation, quarantine, or closure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The General Assembly has now returned to its operations for the first time since March, and in consultation with leadership in the statehouse, my administration has decided to withdraw this rule in order to pursue legislation with the same intended mechanism in a phased manner in line with the Restore Illinois plan.

 

Enacting this measure through legislation will allow us to have these tools through our the Restore Illinois plan versus an emergency rule that would be withdrawn and rewritten at the start of phase three and then phase four. I’m here today with Illinois State Police director Brendan Kelly as well as Leader Bill Cunningham, who is sponsoring this legislation. I urge the General Assembly to take up and pass this legislation this week. Given the importance of what we are trying to do here, we will look to file an additional rule if legislation does not occur.

 

 

Same result, different method to get there

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s getting pushback and his office is beginning to realize he overstepped his authority. He tried to salvage some dignity before getting spanked in a court challenge or dealing with widespread disobedience or protest. He still might see some significant civil disobedience and protest. This man makes fear based decisions. He is not a leader.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't over. Contact your state senator and representative. Politely let them know how you feel about executive overreach, and ask them to please not facilitate it by any legislation they may vote to pass.

I heard today that he is going to try and get the ILGA to pass a bill based on his "edict".

With all the tax money this state needs, the fact that this corpulent pig wants to CLOSE businesses boggles the mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...