Blue states end mask mandates just in time for State of the Union
On Inauguration Day, even before President Joe Biden was seated for his first dinner in the White House as president of the United States, he signed a plethora of executive orders.
Among this group was a rather innocuous sounding one, Executive Order 13991, labeled “Protecting the Federal Workforce and Requiring Mask Wearing.” Yet barely after the ink dried enough to not smear, that EO was positioned to smear the credibility of his presidency.
How was this possible so soon after his inauguration?
My inauguration experience was watching an inauguration parade and festivities from a law firm window that, to use a title from a Thomas Hardy novel, was “far from the madding crowd.” Mr. Hardy’s inspiration for the title was the verse from the Thomas Gray (1716-1771) poem “Elegy written in a Country Churchyard:
Far from the ‘madding crowd’s’ ignoble strife,
Their noble wishes ‘never learn’d to stray,’
Among the cool “sequestered vale” of life,
They kept the noiseless tenor of their way (emphasis added).
Amazingly 272 years after this poem was written that it would be applicable to EO 13991.
EO 13991, signed Jan. 20, 2021, was misleading as it was applicable not only to the “Federal workforce” but also to the “madding crowd” of “individuals interacting with the federal workforce.” My article “Vaccine Mandate for Federal Contractors,” published Feb. 13 in the News-Press, discussed federal courts enjoining the vaccine mandate for federal contractors.
EO 13991 also includes the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s version of the “sequestered vale” by including that covered people should maintain a “social distance of six feet from potential disease carriers,” which includes even those vaccinated.
The “noiseless tenor” refers to the muffling effect of the required cloth masks. (Even the zealots deferred to the paper masks largely imported from China.)
Poet Thomas Gray’s phrase “Never learned to stray” is related to the executive order, in the provision that “exceptions only as required by law” while containing neither an expiration date nor any conditions that can lead to ending the executive order. Even bottled water has an expiration date printed on it.
Section 4c of EO 13991 contains provisions that make even retired corporate attorneys, like me, fantasize about how much stress would have been eliminated from our lives if we could have added terms such as “This is not intended to, and does not create, any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity, by any party against the United States, its departments, agonies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.”
With the stroke of that pen on that fateful afternoon on Jan. 20, every person administering this EO was free of the risk of balancing the benefits with the risks of violating any laws. Heck, in Monopoly, my 9-year-old grandson giggles when drawing a “Get out of jail free” card.
Mandatory actions were a key part of the current administration’s program to combat the various versions of COVID-19. My articles discussed the courts deciding that the motivations were political, which led courts to issue nationwide injunctions against mandatory vaccinations — “OSHA: Law or Politics?” (News Press, Jan. 23) and “Vaccines and Federal Contractors” (News Press, Feb. 6) — as well as permitting the mandate for the CMS division of the Health and Human Services agency for healthcare workers (“Vaccine mandate and the Golden Rule, News-Press, Jan 30).
The arguments for scientific motivations were dealt a blow when — without any changes in the science, but with polls indicating the president’s popularity sinking below everyone except Vice President Kamala Harris, indicating their Democratic Party could lose seats in the November election — they announced they were following the Republican-run or red states in eliminating some, or all, of the requirements to wear masks. OK, I exaggerate as there was no mention of blue or red states, or of the lower rates of infections in red states, such as Florida, which have not followed EO 13991’s requirements.
But there was also no mention of any scientific breakthroughs.
As you read the list of blue or Democratic-run states that are eliminating some, or all, mask requirements, notice the dates: California (Feb. 15), Connecticut (Feb. 28), Delaware (Feb. 11), Illinois (Feb. 28), Massachusetts (Feb. 28), Nevada (Feb. 10), New Jersey (March 7), New York (Feb. 17) and Washington state (Feb. 18).
Why are so many blue states choosing before, or closely following, March 1, 2022? What happens on March 1?
What a coincidence! That is the day the president will deliver his State of the Union address.
According to former New York police officer and secret agent Dan Bongino, there is a rumor that President Joe Biden wants to refer to his successes with COVID-19 — successes that enabled states to reduce the masks requirements.
At the risk of “looking at a gift horse in the mouth,” a Latin expression meaning “looking at a horse’s teeth to determine its age,” the precedent would be the president’s speech for the 20th anniversary of 9/11 and the botched withdrawal during the same year from Afghanistan, which left terrorists $85 billion in the latest military equipment, U.S. citizens and friendly locals.
On March 1, the veracity of the rumors can be determined. Meanwhile, the continuing loss of credibility of many Democratic leaders’ programs based on their masks requirements being for “thee but not me” are on full display at such places as former President Barack Obama’s birthday party, and at expensive dinners in such places as the French Laundry, or at football games, like the Super Bowl, by governors and the mayors of blue states and cities like Los Angeles, Chicago and New York or even Speaker Nancy Pelosi at a beauty parlor.
Perhaps the most bizarre example is the White House requiring masks for the federal employees guarding the southern border but not for the 7,000-a-day mask-ess border crossers who then interact with US citizens. Meanwhile, Republican governors, such as those in Florida and Texas, followed the rule of “treat others as you would like to be treated” by eliminating the mask requirement for everyone.
Shame President Joe Biden did not enjoy at least one dinner in the White House “far from the madding crowd” as president before signing EO 13991.
Brent E. Zepke is an attorney, arbitrator and author who lives in Santa Barbara. Formerly he taught at six universities and numerous professional conferences. He is the author of six books: “One Heart-Two Lives,” “Legal Guide to Human Resources,” “Business Statistics,” “Labor Law,” “Products and the Consumer” and “Law for Non-Lawyers.”
