Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
D&D and the rising pandemic
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 8083953" data-attributes="member: 19675"><p>Umbran did a pretty good job of covering your points of inquiry. I may be able to shed a bit more light.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It’s not going to be in the mask mandate- it’s already in the overarching federal & state statutes and even case law. Public health laws have been interpreted as being pretty firm. Mary Mallon- a.k.a. Typhoid Mary- was institutionalized <strong>for the last 30 years of her life</strong> in a medical facility on an island off of NYC, essentially because she repeatedly ignored public health orders designed to keep her from spreading her disease. Many of the people she infected didn’t know her background, but SHE did. And kept ignoring the orders anyway.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As Umbran pointed out, if you’re asserting a legal claim, you have to provide proof. That’s basic stuff. For example, if you’re being age carded when purchasing alcohol or requesting admissions to a concert at a bar, you don’t HAVE to provide proof, but if you don’t, you can legally be turned away. They don’t have to take your word for it, and if they do, they face fines and license forfeiture...even if you’re being truthful. (Those penalties are not dependent on your truthfulness, but on their requirements of due diligence.)</p><p></p><p>And if you bring suit agains the bar or liquor store for denying your service despite your being of legal age, the very first question YOU will be asked is “Did you provide proof of your age. If the answer is “No.”, the gavel will bang and you’ve just lost your case.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In a pandemic where a significant disease vector is asymptomatic transmission- such as it is with C19- asymptomatic transmission will rise to the legal requirement of “immanence” in almost any court of initial jurisdiction. Any court that doesn’t follow the science on that will likely get their findings overruled by a higher court.</p><p></p><p>Relying on the opinion statements of government officials is of little to no value. If you try that with a tax case, for example, even relying on a written opinion by an IRS agent will be insufficient to protect you in a tax case if the opinion is found to be erroneous as a matter of law.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Besides the caveat Umbran pointed out, In most cases, federal law trumps state law. Someone relying on a state law to override federal disclosure requirements is playing Russian roulette with only one bullet removed from the revolver.</p><p></p><p>Not only that, but even the ADA has provisions regarding legal involuntary disclosure of a patient’s conditions (though most of the defining thereof is in case law).</p><p><a href="http://www.adagreatlakes.org/Publications/Legal_Briefs/BriefNo31_Confidentiality_Requirements_Under_the_ADA_2018.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.adagreatlakes.org/Publications/Legal_Briefs/BriefNo31_Confidentiality_Requirements_Under_the_ADA_2018.pdf</a></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The base charge is almost always going to be trespassing or disturbing the peace because the person making the claim is doing so in a place of business- a.k.a. someone else’s private property- and those are the most common grounds for ejection. They break down like this:</p><p></p><p>Trespass: refusing to leave the premises after not complying with the property owner’s (or legal representatives) lawful request that you obey the store’s terms of service or leave</p><p></p><p>DTP: making a big verbal and/or physical ruckus about wearing the mask and/or being asked to leave</p><p></p><p>Part of the reason you haven’t seen any cases based in a HIPPA assertion or similar defense is that lawyers are burdened with a mandate that their pleadings in a case not be frivolous. If their pleadings don’t pass the court’s sniff test, that could definitely get them rebukes, less leeway on their next appearance before that judge (IOW, the next client’s representation- regardless of identity, may be affected), fines, and, if bad enough, official censure from the bar.</p><p></p><p>So if a client wants to try a HIPAA defense in one of these cases, and can’t convince their lawyer, that lawyer is not going to plead it. If the client insists, the lawyer will probably not take the case. Or if already engaged, will try to resign.</p><p></p><p>Because of this, you’re extremely unlikely to EVER see a HIPPA defense in any of these anti-mask cases.</p><p></p><p>And the case law support? Well, there’s over 115 years of SCOTUS-level precedent on the power of public health orders. Masking laws aren’t even mid-tier problematic- some of those were challenged during the Spanish Flu. They failed.</p><p></p><p>*****</p><p><strong>EDIT</strong>: <em>Jacobsen v. Massachusetts </em>in 1905 dealt with the much more physically invasive- and thus, legally, requiring greater justification- matter of mandatory vaccination and <em>re</em>vaccination orders. The court ruled that the smallpox epidemic played a huge factor in the decision, saying the widespread smallpox outbreak justified a general rule for vaccination, saying the state was working to protect public health and safety.</p><p></p><p>If the state can order you to get an injection, forcing you to wear a mask is kid stuff.</p><p></p><p>And private businesses can likewise insist on masks as a condition of entry. Those “No shirt, no shoes, no service” signs are perfectly legal and enforceable...and originally based in state & federal public health regs, Heck, even non-health related dress codes are enfoceav as long as they’re not discriminatory in nature or enforcement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 8083953, member: 19675"] Umbran did a pretty good job of covering your points of inquiry. I may be able to shed a bit more light. It’s not going to be in the mask mandate- it’s already in the overarching federal & state statutes and even case law. Public health laws have been interpreted as being pretty firm. Mary Mallon- a.k.a. Typhoid Mary- was institutionalized [B]for the last 30 years of her life[/B] in a medical facility on an island off of NYC, essentially because she repeatedly ignored public health orders designed to keep her from spreading her disease. Many of the people she infected didn’t know her background, but SHE did. And kept ignoring the orders anyway. As Umbran pointed out, if you’re asserting a legal claim, you have to provide proof. That’s basic stuff. For example, if you’re being age carded when purchasing alcohol or requesting admissions to a concert at a bar, you don’t HAVE to provide proof, but if you don’t, you can legally be turned away. They don’t have to take your word for it, and if they do, they face fines and license forfeiture...even if you’re being truthful. (Those penalties are not dependent on your truthfulness, but on their requirements of due diligence.) And if you bring suit agains the bar or liquor store for denying your service despite your being of legal age, the very first question YOU will be asked is “Did you provide proof of your age. If the answer is “No.”, the gavel will bang and you’ve just lost your case. In a pandemic where a significant disease vector is asymptomatic transmission- such as it is with C19- asymptomatic transmission will rise to the legal requirement of “immanence” in almost any court of initial jurisdiction. Any court that doesn’t follow the science on that will likely get their findings overruled by a higher court. Relying on the opinion statements of government officials is of little to no value. If you try that with a tax case, for example, even relying on a written opinion by an IRS agent will be insufficient to protect you in a tax case if the opinion is found to be erroneous as a matter of law. Besides the caveat Umbran pointed out, In most cases, federal law trumps state law. Someone relying on a state law to override federal disclosure requirements is playing Russian roulette with only one bullet removed from the revolver. Not only that, but even the ADA has provisions regarding legal involuntary disclosure of a patient’s conditions (though most of the defining thereof is in case law). [URL]http://www.adagreatlakes.org/Publications/Legal_Briefs/BriefNo31_Confidentiality_Requirements_Under_the_ADA_2018.pdf[/URL] The base charge is almost always going to be trespassing or disturbing the peace because the person making the claim is doing so in a place of business- a.k.a. someone else’s private property- and those are the most common grounds for ejection. They break down like this: Trespass: refusing to leave the premises after not complying with the property owner’s (or legal representatives) lawful request that you obey the store’s terms of service or leave DTP: making a big verbal and/or physical ruckus about wearing the mask and/or being asked to leave Part of the reason you haven’t seen any cases based in a HIPPA assertion or similar defense is that lawyers are burdened with a mandate that their pleadings in a case not be frivolous. If their pleadings don’t pass the court’s sniff test, that could definitely get them rebukes, less leeway on their next appearance before that judge (IOW, the next client’s representation- regardless of identity, may be affected), fines, and, if bad enough, official censure from the bar. So if a client wants to try a HIPAA defense in one of these cases, and can’t convince their lawyer, that lawyer is not going to plead it. If the client insists, the lawyer will probably not take the case. Or if already engaged, will try to resign. Because of this, you’re extremely unlikely to EVER see a HIPPA defense in any of these anti-mask cases. And the case law support? Well, there’s over 115 years of SCOTUS-level precedent on the power of public health orders. Masking laws aren’t even mid-tier problematic- some of those were challenged during the Spanish Flu. They failed. ***** [B]EDIT[/B]: [I]Jacobsen v. Massachusetts [/I]in 1905 dealt with the much more physically invasive- and thus, legally, requiring greater justification- matter of mandatory vaccination and [I]re[/I]vaccination orders. The court ruled that the smallpox epidemic played a huge factor in the decision, saying the widespread smallpox outbreak justified a general rule for vaccination, saying the state was working to protect public health and safety. If the state can order you to get an injection, forcing you to wear a mask is kid stuff. And private businesses can likewise insist on masks as a condition of entry. Those “No shirt, no shoes, no service” signs are perfectly legal and enforceable...and originally based in state & federal public health regs, Heck, even non-health related dress codes are enfoceav as long as they’re not discriminatory in nature or enforcement. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
D&D and the rising pandemic
Top