Constitutionality of bans of > 10 person gatherings

Here we go again. We cannot question anything because if we do it means that we want people to die so we can go drink at the bar. That’s not what I am saying.

I am saying that an equal policy choice, advocated by others not me, have been to let this play out as for the vast majority of people the symptoms are minor and they quickly recover, and the flip side is the complete destruction of our economy. Who makes that decision in a constitutional democracy?

We don’t look to constitutional constraints? We don’t vote on it? We have one man making this massive policy choice all on his own, and again, in a way that has no parallel in history and no objective end to it? Can it go on for a year if it means that it saves only one single life? Can we vote on it then?