Reforming the Emergency Management Act is about good governance, regardless of who resides in the governor’s mansion. No individual should have the power unilaterally to deprive citizens of their liberty for an extended period. Reforms would still allow for rapid responses for true emergencies.
The North Carolina Emergency Management Act (EMA) delegates too much power to the executive branch and provides too little legislative guidance and oversight. This article proposes specific changes to the EMA to correct these deficiencies and restore the separation of powers guaranteed by the North Carolina State Constitution.
The first three counts are concerned with the discriminatory way Cooper has applied the Emergency Management Act. The last two counts, on the other hand, point to problems with the EMA itself — problems that can only be solved by amending the act.
Free people should never have to prove they have a right to live their lives free from government interference. Instead, it is the government that bears the burden of justifying the restrictions it wishes to impose, and the more severe the proposed restrictions, the stronger the justification must be.
Prior to the election, I emphasized the importance of the upcoming judicial races in North Carolina and urged voters to “choose wisely.” Judging by the results, I think they did. Compared with past years, an unusually high percentage of voters took the time to vote for judicial candidates this time around.
Cooper will continue to occupy the Governor’s mansion, and he’s made it very clear he intends to go on issuing lockdown orders without COS concurrence. Which raises a question for those of us who still object to those orders: what can we do about them now?
My level of anxiety increased steadily throughout the summer as each morning brought news of more violent protests in cities across the country and as the Democrats pursued their relentless attack on state election laws. As I looked at the election returns on the morning of November 4, however, I suddenly felt much better. Here’s how I explained it to a friend.
If the candidate who appears to have lost on election day eventually wins because of late arriving ballots, the public is going to suspect fraud, and with good reason. Late arriving ballots have always been a hallmark of election fraud.
Given that such last-minute changes are precisely the harm the Purcell principle is supposed to prevent, these court results are surprising. This explanation will show they are also wrong.
When you go to the polls, or when you fill out your absentee ballots, remember that the NC Supreme Court justices you choose will be able to exercise more power over you and your family than any other candidates on the ballot. So choose wisely!
