Indiana Parents Sue Governor Over Quarantining Healthy Kids

A group of parents in northeastern Indiana has reached their breaking point with government officials turning deaf ears to their children’s suffering under irrational and scientifically unfounded COVID rules with no clear end point.

After spending months trying to work with local officials to get their kids’ lives “back to normal,” only to have their school board allegedly break its own rules to mandate masks and quarantines of the healthy barely two weeks into this school year, four families filed a lawsuit against Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb (R), his Indiana State Department of Health and its commissioner, their county health commissioner, Northwest Allen County Schools and its superintendent, and their local school board and several of its members.

The lawsuit alleges these officials have broken state laws and the state and national constitutions by quarantine “searches and seizures” that violate the Fourth Amendment and repeatedly restricting Hoosier children’s constitutionally guaranteed right to a public education based on unproven allegations that the children are COVID-infectious.

“It used to be that if you missed 10 days of school you were truant. Now kids are missing 30-40 days of school”a year because of extreme quarantine rules, said Andrew Frisinger, a father and plaintiff in the lawsuit.

In recent weeks, the district has sent more than 1 in 10 students home to quarantine based on the state’s “close contact” standard. Nearly all of those children were healthy. The lawsuit seeks precise data about how many children forced to quarantine were actually sick, as the district has not released that information publicly.

Walking through school halls in the district where he grew up, met his wife, enrolls his kids, and has spent years volunteering as a coach for myriad sports, “felt like walking into a funeral” under COVID regulations, Frisinger said: “Lunchrooms are quiet, hallways are quiet. Teachers who should be teaching are now focused on masks. Five years ago, we would have said, ‘This is not America.’”

‘Arbitrary, Capricious, and Vague’

Even when children are allowed in school, their learning is undermined by a fear-driven and science-free mask mandate and other COVID fear structures that make it hard to see people’s facial expressions, make schools a joyless and oppressive environment, and turn teachers from educators into mask police, said the parents who filed the lawsuit in a group call with The Federalist.

They are deeply concerned that their children’s most recent three school years—one-quarter of their K-12 careers—have been constantly disrupted and for no health benefits. It is well documented that children are the demographic at least risk from COVID. Yet children are being denied the education crucial to their futures, with no end in sight.

“To me it feels like they’re holding our kids’ education hostage. You can have all this that your tax dollars are paying for if you follow this rule, this arbitrary mandate,” Frisinger said.

The parents spoke of the effects on their kids of never knowing if a school event or school itself would go forward as planned, of their own and their kids’ confusion that rules arbitrarily differ from school to school and county to county with no apparent relation to health outcomes, of patently ridiculous rules like having kids eat and play sports together without masks yet the same kids on the same day being forced to mask to get on the bus.

“Not being able to play sports for some of my kids has been very hard. My children had to be at home countless days because of this, which has affected their grades. My oldest suffers from hearing loss, so you can imagine how hard that’s been,” said Jacqui Christman, a mother of five and with her husband also plaintiffs in the suit.

Some of their kids who have never gotten in trouble at school before are now constantly in trouble for mask violations, and some don’t want to go to school at all because of the massive psychological pressure, the parents said. With kids safer from COVID than from all the other flus that have never altered school operations, why are the adults doing this to them? Nobody will answer that question or just about any other, the parents said.

“The challenged quarantine procedures and contact-tracing program lack any rational basis, are arbitrary, capricious, and vague, have no real or substantial relation to the objectives of the program or mandate, and violate the Plaintiffs’ fundamental rights,” says the lawsuit.

Parents: This Is Our Last Resort

After seeking relief through every other means they could think of—attending school board meetings, calling and emailing elected representatives, talking with administrators—for now three school years, the parents feel they have no other option but to file a lawsuit, said their lawyer, Kevin Mitchell. The parents repeatedly expressed that they considered this step a last resort after they spent years trying everything else and getting nowhere.

“These are healthy kids they’re quarantining,” said plaintiff Mike Bell, a father of four. “We know it may bring unwanted attention to us or our kids. But we’re three years into this and it’s not going away. We’ve been patient, and we’re just done. No one is listening, and they [elected officials] keep pointing the finger at someone else. So I’m choosing to stand up for my kids, and I believe kids everywhere, and I am proud to be fighting for our kids and doing what we feel is right.”

The families described themselves as not rich or powerful, as a “simple fireman,” teacher, volunteer coach, moms, and dads who represent the “simple majority.” They believe they represent the clear majority of parents in their district, region, and state, noting that when students and locals are allowed to choose whether to wear a mask almost none do. They started a GoFundMe to help with legal expenses (disclosure: after learning about the fund while reporting this story, this author donated).

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

Indiana state law defines under what circumstances people may be placed under effective house arrest with a quarantine, and that law has not been followed during the entire pandemic, notes the lawsuit. One of the law’s requirements is that people must be proven to be contagious before they are forced to stay home under threat of arrest.

Local school requirements based on 18 months of constantly shifting executive decrees, however, flip that on its head and assume children are sick if they spent a cumulative 15 minutes in a day near someone who later tested positive, the lawsuit notes. It says this violates citizens’ rights to live freely until proven, through due process, to have violated the law. This also violates the children’s right to an education, the lawsuit alleges, by subjecting children to unlimited 14-day quarantines even when they are not sick.

“The whole structure has shifted to students and families to prove they are well enough to go to school. As a legal matter, that is sobering, and we should consider that,” Mitchell said in an individual interview. “Compare it to the Fourth Amendment context—when it comes to a search, there has to be a legal cause. To tell a student you cannot attend school unless you disprove something, that constitutional right to attend school has flipped. And that’s a right under the Indiana Constitution.”

The lawsuit also makes a rare challenge to the governor’s emergency powers, alleging state law does not authorize Indiana’s governor to “mandate medical treatment or intervention, including face masks, in K-12 schools.” The emergency powers law states its limit is 30 days. Yet Holcomb has now unilaterally extended his emergency powers a record 17 times.

“The position the health agencies are taking is [that] we’re in this indefinite health emergency and even though life has continued in other avenues, the students should continue to live restricted while everyone else is not,” Mitchell said, noting that Hoosiers are working, eating out, shopping, going to professional sports games and festivals, and living normally, without masks, just about everywhere except school.

Are There Any Limits to ‘Emergency Powers’?

The lawsuit also alleges that the governor’s myriad COVID dictates—which he has issued at least biweekly for the past year and a half—usurp the legislature’s constitutional authority to write and pass laws. Legally, governors are supposed to carry out the laws the legislature passes, not effectively legislate through executive orders.

“Certainly the governor has emergency authority, so the question then becomes what constitutes an emergency under the statute?” said former Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill, a Republican, in a telephone interview. “It’s not a question whether an emergency occurred, the question becomes how long can you continue the process of the emergency and what is it you are authorized to do pursuant to that emergency?”

The state legislature has the authority to stop the governor’s lawlessness and end the state of emergency, Hill noted, but has for two years now left Hoosiers subject to arbitrary executive rule: “An emergency should only go so far, and at some point you want to enact legislative policy to direct people’s conduct. If there’s a reason to restrict the freedom of any Hoosier, that restriction should be subject to a legal exercise by the general assembly, those elected by the people.”

The office of the current state attorney general, Republican Todd Rokita, declined a request for comment on this case. Rokita has issued an opinion stating that in some cases state universities may force students to take COVID-19 injections.

The following request for comment was emailed to Holcomb’s press secretary, Erin Murphy:

Dear Erin,

I’m wrapping up the story I called you about repeatedly several days ago, and it’s set to go live early next week. It’s about a lawsuit against the governor and his health department based on their school masking and quarantine rules as enforced in Northwest Allen County schools.

I’m especially curious about the governor’s position on this contrasted with his statement condemning Joe Biden’s recent COVID mandates as ‘a bridge too far.’ I’d like to know what the governor sees as the main differences between his emergency rule and Biden’s emergency rulings, which appear to this layperson to be pretty indistinguishable.

In addition, I would like to know the governor’s position on the limits of his claimed emergency powers — that he can legally keep renewing Indiana’s state of emergency indefinitely? If that’s the case, how does an ‘emergency’ last 18 months and when do Hoosiers get their rights back?

I’m also curious about whether the governor has ensured that all the Biden-administration-approved Afghan refugees he’s welcomed into our state have gotten their COVID shots and whether they are being required to follow his health department’s quarantine and masking rules, or whether those are only applicable to American citizens.

Thank you! If I don’t hear from you by Monday I will be including this email in my article in full.

Murphy declined to comment on this case, claiming, “We don’t comment on pending litigation.” A review of the last 12 months of press releases from Holcomb’s office, however, shows him publicly commenting on several events involving pending litigation, including the assassination of an Indiana police officer, the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol melee, state attorneys general opposing Biden’s vaccination mandate, and a lawsuit Holcomb filed to prevent the state legislature from restraining his emergency powers.

The next step in the lawsuit is for those sued to respond within approximately the next three weeks.

‘The pandemic is real, but children are neither victims nor vectors of this,” Frisinger said. “I just want to get back to normal, not only for the students but also for the staff we all support and love, and for the parents that are so confused right now.”

Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Her newest ebook is a design-your-own summer camp kit, and her bestselling ebook is "Classic Books for Young Children." Sign up here to get early access to her next full-length book, "How To Control The Internet So It Doesn’t Control You." A Hillsdale College honors graduate, @JoyPullmann is also the author of "The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids," from Encounter Books. 

Indiana Parents Sue Governor Over COVID Rules: ‘These Are Healthy Kids They’re Quarantining…And We’re Just Done’https://t.co/KX9FIbnWKy

— The Federalist (@FDRLST) September 27, 2021

A Church That Defied LA County COVID Health Orders May Win $400K

LA County to pay $400,000 to settle with San Fernando Valley church that defied coronavirus orders

A legal battle between Los Angeles County, the state and a Sun Valley church that repeatedly flouted health restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic could be coming to an end, with the county Board of Supervisors being asked next week to approve a $400,000 payment to the church to settle the case.

According to a county staff report, the settlement calls for the state to pay an additional $400,000 to resolve the litigation with Grace Community Church. The report, first obtained by KNX Newsradio, indicates that the county has already spent more than $950,000 in attorneys fees and other costs related to the legal battle with the church.

The church, led by Pastor John MacArthur, repeatedly defied county health orders over the past year, most notably by continuing to hold indoor services despite a ban on such gatherings, while also refusing to enforce mask-wearing and social-distancing requirements for church-goers.

County health officials repeatedly cited the church, then took the matter to court to obtain an injunction requiring the church to adhere to health regulations, saying they were essential to control the spread of COVID-19. The church, meanwhile, sued the state and the county, claiming the COVID rules amounted to constitutional violations of religious freedom.

Last September, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff issued a preliminary injunction sought by the county, but the church essentially ignored it, continuing to hold indoor services and violating other health mandates. That led county attorneys to seek a contempt ruling against the church.

Grace Community Church attorneys fought back, filing a motion to have the injunction lifted and the contempt request dismissed, citing two U.S. Supreme Court decisions. In one, a Catholic diocese and a group of Jewish synagogues successfully challenged New York's restrictions on churches. The high court later struck down the indoor worship ban while allowing caps on attendance and a ban on singing, according to the church's attorneys.

The Balancing Act of Herd Immunity - Wealth vs Health

Harvard Suggest Intermittent Social Distancing Could Be More Effective

Harvard University researchers say an on-again, off-again approach to social distancing could be a more effective strategy to avoid overwhelming hospitals and to build herd immunity against the novel coronavirus — but other experts aren’t so sure.

An April study, conducted at Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, championed intermittent social distancing — measures that are periodically reimposed when cases reach certain levels.

According to the researchers’ modeling, as long as social distancing occurred between 25 percent and 75 percent of the time, the world could both build immunity and keep the healthcare system from overloading.  Watch the video on this page.

Social distancing restrictions could be eased under various scenarios, according to the authors—if COVID-19 treatments become available, if hospitals can increase their intensive care bed capacity, if there’s aggressive contact tracing and quarantine, or if a vaccine is developed.

“I think social distancing interventions of some sort are going to have to continue, hopefully, lightened and in conjunction with other interventions,” said Marc Lipsitch, professor of epidemiology and director of the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics and co-senior author of the study, in an April 14 article in STAT.

Here is a video explaining how the no lockdown strategy and accelerated "herd immunity" might be working in Sweden but also explains the risks.   Sweden prefers to use the term "transmission" for fear that they are perceived as giving up on fighting the disease.  Sweden's strategy would mean their death toll will be higher earlier and lower later as herd immunity is achieved.  Thus, Sweden would not likely experience a second wave of transmission in the fall and winter months.   



It also raises the question of how many people are actually following the stay at home orders? 

Here is a Twitter poll asking if Intermittent social distancing would be effective? 

According to researchers' modelling, if social distancing occurred between 25 and 75 per cent of the time, the world could keep health-care systems from overloading.

Do you think that intermittent social distancing would be effective?

Read more: https://t.co/kohGB8tayJ

— Globalnews.ca (@globalnews) May 4, 2020

Only Half Of Americans Likely To Comply With New COVID Lockdown

Here's the data, according to Gallup, based on the poll taken between Oct.19 and Nov.1:

• 49% say they're "very likely" to stay home for a month if mandated, down from 67% who said they would in the spring.
• 18% said they were "somewhat likely" to comply.
• One-third said they would be "unlikely" to comply with new lockdown orders.
• This despite 61% saying they believe the situation is getting worse.
• The number of respondents who said they'd be unlikely to comply is double the rate seen from polls in the spring.

About half of Americans in Gallup's latest polling on the COVID-19 pandemic, 49%, say they would be very likely to stay home for a month if public health officials recommended it due to a serious outbreak of the virus in their community. This contrasts with solid majorities in the spring who said they were likely to comply with such shelter-in-place advice, including a high of 67% in late March/early April.

Another 18% of Americans say they would be somewhat likely to follow public health officials' advice to stay home for a month, bringing the total inclined to comply to the majority level. But a full third say they would be very or somewhat unlikely to comply, about double the rate seen in the spring.

Most of the decline in Americans' willingness to follow shelter-in-place advice is due to a sharp drop among Republicans -- falling to 40% in Gallup's latest polling, from 74% in the spring. Democrats' willingness to stay at home has remained high, at 87% today versus 91% in March and April.

The latest data are from Gallup's Oct. 19-Nov. 1 probability-based panel survey tracking Americans' attitudes and behaviors related to the pandemic. The online Gallup Panel survey encompassed a period of rising COVID-19 cases across the country, with 31 states experiencing their highest one-day new infection rates thus far.

Relatively few Americans (29%) during this period thought their own area was "very likely" to experience a surge of coronavirus cases in the coming weeks, while another 40% considered it somewhat likely.

One significant change since April that may explain why Americans are now less likely to say they would go into home lockdown is that they have greater confidence in their ability to protect themselves from being infected by the coronavirus when out in public.

The percentage of feeling very or somewhat confident in their ability to avoid infection rose from 68% in mid-April to 82% in June and has since remained at that level.

Florida Restaurants 100% Open & Super Bowl Stadium Will Be Full

On Friday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed an executive order permitting restaurants and bars to start running at 100 percent capacity immediately. 

The step suggests that the state is transitioning into reopening phase 3. In terms of what local governments can do to limit operations, the order handles restaurants and bars differently. 

"There would be no restrictions," he said, from the state of Florida. 

DeSantis said that he completely expects the state in February to host a "full stadium Super Bowl." It's The Super Bowl.

"We're anticipating a complete Super Bowl, and we're going to prove that we can do that," he said. 

If a local government Covid-19 emergency order limiting restaurant to less than 100% of its indoor capacity but above 50%, the government must explain why the limitation is necessary for public health and quantify the economic impact of the limits.

"If a local (government) restricts between 50 and 100, they've got to provide the justification and they've got to identify what the costs are involved with doing that is," DeSantis said.

"Every business has a right to operate... you can’t just say 'no' after six months and have people twisting in the wind,” he said.

The order also bars cities and counties from ordering restaurants to close, unless they can justify a closure for economic or health reasons.

Mayor Jerry Demings of Orange County said he was surprised that he did not know about DeSantis' executive order until Friday's press conference. 

"As we deal with this pandemic, everything happens at a local level, this is where the rubber meets the road. And in order for us to be effective at dealing with the virus, we have to have good communications across the state," Demings said, adding that his office received calls from "numerous businesses" seeking clarity following the governor's statements.

"It really isn't a good look for government, when we are not all on the same sheet of music and so I just hope that the government does better with that," Demings said.

DeSantis, in "an act of executive grace," also suspended "all outstanding fines and penalties that have been applied against individuals" associated with pandemic-related mandates, like mask requirements.

"I think we need to get away from trying to penalize people for social distancing," DeSantis said. "All these fines we're going to hold in abeyance and hope that we can move forward in a way that's more collaborative."

Vulnerable Populations

Individuals older than 65 years of age and individuals with a serious underlying medical condition (such as chronic lung disease, moderate-to-severe asthma, serious heart conditions, immune-compromised status, cancer, diabetes, severe obesity, renal failure, and liver disease) can resume public interactions but should practice social distancing, minimizing exposure to social settings where distancing may not be practical unless precautionary measures are observed. Vulnerable populations should affirmatively inform their employer that they are a member of the vulnerable population so that their employer can plan accordingly.

Social Gatherings

Non-vulnerable populations should consider minimizing time spent in crowded environments

Travel 

Non-essential travel may continue.

EMPLOYERS

Telework 

Employees should resume unrestricted staffing of worksites and implement the final phasing in of employees returning to work. For vulnerable populations, teleworking can be considered. 

Employee Screening

Employers should take prudent and practical measures to ensure employees do not enter the premises if they believe they are infected with COVID-19 or show symptoms of influenza-like illness.

Travel 

Employees should resume non-essential travel and adhere to CDC guidelines regarding isolation following travel.

Local Government Meetings

These meetings should return to in-person quorum and public participation for local government bodies.

OTHER

Bars, Pubs and Nightclubs

Bars, pubs, and nightclubs that derive more than 50 percent of sales from alcohol should operate at full capacity with limited social distancing protocols. Businesses should maintain adequate sanitation practices among employees and patrons during all hours of operation.  Menus, if laminated, should be cleaned after each usage. Paper menus should be designed for single-use and then disposed of immediately after use.

Restaurants

Restaurants and foodservice establishments may operate at full capacity with limited social distancing protocols. Businesses should maintain adequate sanitation practices among employees and patrons during all hours of operation. Menus, if laminated, should continue to be cleaned after each usage. Paper menus shall be designed for single-use and then disposed of immediately after use.

Gyms and Fitness Centers

Gyms and fitness centers should open to full capacity but should maintain adequate

sanitation practices among employees and patrons during all hours of operation.

Recreation

State Parks: State parks should be fully opened, including overnight accommodations.

Public Beaches: Beaches should remain fully open.

Large Venues: (i.e. movie theaters, concert halls, auditoriums, bowling alleys, arcades, playhouses, casinos) These venues should re-open fully with limited social distancing protocols.

Large Sporting Events and Theme Parks

Large spectator sporting events should consider reducing capacity with limited social distancing protocols.

Theme parks may return to normal operations with limited social distancing protocols.

Vacation Rentals

Vacation Rentals should resume normal operating procedures but should continue to thoroughly clean and disinfect the property between rentals. 

Personal Services Businesses

Personal Services Businesses, such as cosmetology salons, barbershops, and nail salons, should operate under full capacity but should consider the following mitigation measures:

Continue to maintain adequate sanitation practices for employees and patrons.

Regularly clean and disinfect working stations and equipment between interactions with customers to the greatest frequency feasible.

Remove all unnecessary, frequent-touch items such as magazines, newspapers, service menus, any other unnecessary paper products and décor from customer service areas.

Retail Businesses

Operators of retail businesses should operate at full capacity but should continue to maintain adequate sanitation practices for employees and patrons.

Fake Laws Designed By Phony Lawmakers

Here is a prime example of a fake law "closing hair salons" for Coronavirus fears and yet the House Majority Speaker Nancy Pelosi gets to break the law herself.  This is hypocrisy at its finest moment while American small business owners are getting crushed.  Coronavirus rules and local laws not be obeyed by everyone, especially those in political power. 

A fundraiser for the San Francisco-based hair salon whose owner says she needs to relocate her business after releasing video of a maskless House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reached its goal of $327,000+, the salon owner announced. Erica Kious thanked those who donated to a GoFundMe page for her amid her feud with Pelosi (D-Calif.).

It is easy to think that we should all react the same way to events, new laws, and rules in the world and so should we have similar responses to them. But that’s not quite what happens in our brains.  Most people do not have the capacity to capture all the information that is coming through our senses – what we see, hear, and feel. 

Instead, we pay attention to the information that is most relevant to us and use it to create an interpretation of what is happening in the world. In other words, we tell ourselves a story about what is happening and then react to our story.  Some people have common sense reasoning and some just do what they are told.   Some people also call this common sense or independent thinking.  Where has our common sense gone? 

California County COVID-19 Transmission Risk Map

California County Covid-19 Risk Map

Every county in California is assigned to a color-coded tier based on its rate of new cases and positivity. At a minimum, counties must remain in a tier for at least 3 weeks before moving forward. Data is reviewed weekly and tiers are updated on Tuesdays. To move forward, a county must meet the next tier’s criteria for two consecutive weeks. If a county’s metrics worsen for two consecutive weeks, it will be assigned a more restrictive tier. Public health officials are constantly monitoring data and can step in if necessary.

What Are The California County Risk Levels?

This framework lays out the measures that each county must meet, based on indicators that capture disease burden, testing, and health equity. A county may be more restrictive than this framework. This framework also notes signals of concern, including impacted healthcare capacity that may lead to a dimming intervention. This framework replaces the current County Data Monitoring metrics. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to be an evolving situation and new evidence and understanding emerge, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) will continue to reassess metric thresholds. See the chart below for the framework metrics as set according to tiers based on the risk of community disease transmission.

Schools may reopen for in-person instruction based on equivalent criteria to the July 17th School Re-opening Framework previously announced. That framework remains in effect except that Tier 1 is substituted for the previous County Data Monitoring List (which has equivalent criteria to Tier 1). Schools in counties within Tier 1 are not permitted to reopen for in-person instruction, with an exception for waivers granted by local health departments for TK-6 grades. Schools that are not authorized to reopen, including TK-6 schools that have not received a waiver, may provide structured, in-person supervision and services to students under the Guidance for Small Cohorts/Groups of Children and Youth.

 Schools are eligible for reopening fully for in-person instruction following California School Sector Specific Guidelines once the county is off Tier 1 for 14 days, which is similar to being off the County Data Monitoring List for at least 14 days. Potential re-closure should follow the July 17th School Re-opening Framework.

How Many People Followed Stay at Home Orders?

Percent of People Following Stay at Home Orders

Cell phone tracking data suggest that there is zero correlation to shelter in place orders and fewer people spreading the virus.  A huge thank you to SafeGraph.com for sharing this data on this report: U.S. Geographic Responses to Shelter in Place Orders.

Here is a study which showed Home outbreaks were the dominant category (254 of 318 outbreaks; 79.9%), followed by transport (108; 34.0%; note that many outbreaks involved more than one venue category).

The graph below the map showing a slope shows how people began ignoring the stay at home orders gradually in some states and we really din't see an increase in cases in any of these States. 

Here is another map that shows density of infections as a percentage of people by County.

One perfect example is Florida would should have been off the charts with their Spring Break fiasco. Florida virus data is very similar to California that is locked down.

States Lifting Stay at Home Restrictions

Most U.S. states have imposed lockdown measures restricting gathering and social contact, disrupting the lives of hundreds of millions of people and the operations of thousands of businesses. Some states, however, have announced or instituted plans to relax restrictions earlier than others. WSJ

Notice how the purple and red states are all interesting in opening up and getting back to business.  Yes the blue states have more dense populations in some cities.

Summary of election results of the 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016 presidential elections from Wikipedia

What I hope we learn from this crises is to lock down the vulnerable with pre-existing conditions. Not healthy people. I am a firm believer that my immune system needs to be out in the environment to stay strong and exposed to things. Staying home only weakens the immune system.

Government policies going forward need to be based on data correlations & not medical experts!

Study Suggests Outdoor Virus Transmission Data Near 0%