Let me answer that question right away: I don’t know.
That’s pretty much my answer for everything related to the novel coronavirus, because the situation changes so frequently. At the start of the pandemic we were discouraged to wear masks. For a while, people defended Ron DeSantis’ handling of the pandemic in Florida. Later, Europeans felt very smug about how they’d beaten back the virus while Americans struggled with it.
And of course, this not only exists, but inexplicably hasn’t been recalled and pulped:
I do always err on the side of caution when it comes to COVID-19, so if you forced me to take a side, I would lean toward closing the schools when community spread shows up. Indeed, that is now the situation in my own city. But Nicholas Kristof, no laissez-faire, pro-herd-immunity Trump supporter, makes a strong case for keeping schools open even if everything else locks down - the exact opposite of the path some cities have chosen:
Some things are true even though President Trump says them.
Trump has been demanding for months that schools reopen, and on that he seems to have been largely right. Schools, especially elementary schools, do not appear to have been major sources of coronavirus transmission, and remote learning is proving to be a catastrophe for many low-income children.
[…]
Granted, the United States has done such a poor job of controlling the virus that as the pandemic rages across the country it may be necessary to shut some schools. But that should be the last resort.
I’ve been writing since May about the importance of keeping schools open, and initially the debate wasn’t so politicized. But after Trump, trying to project normalcy, blustered in July about schools needing to open, Republicans backed him and too many Democrats instinctively lined up on the other side. Joe Biden echoed their extreme caution, as did many Democratic mayors and governors.
So Democrats helped preside over school closures that have devastated millions of families and damaged children’s futures. Cities such as Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington, D.C., have closed schools while allowing restaurants to operate.
It’s true that Trump was simply trying to downplay the virus. If he wanted schools open, he should have fought the pandemic more seriously and invested federal money to help make school buildings safer against the virus’s spread.
Yet today, while we all want in-classroom instruction, the practical question is whether to operate schools that don’t have optimal ventilation and other protections. The United States has answered by shuttering many schools and turning to remote learning even as many businesses have stayed open or reopened. Much of Europe pursued the opposite route, closing pubs and restaurants but doing everything possible to keep schools operating — and the evidence suggests that Europe has the smarter approach.
In both Europe and the United States, schools have not been linked to substantial transmission, and teachers and family members have not been shown to be at extra risk (this is more clear of elementary schools than of high schools). Meanwhile, the evidence has mounted of the human cost of school closures.
I feel like no matter what we choose, we lose either way. If children miss even more schooling, it will be that much harder for them to catch up. But if Kristof turns out to be wrong - and who hasn’t been humbled by this terrible pandemic at least once - the effects could be catastrophic.
At times like this I’m relieved to be just some blowhard on the internet, instead of having any actual responsibility.
After the press conference from hell, a Democratic Congressman has filed formal complaints against Rudy Giuliani and other Trump lawyers with state Bar associations:
Congressman Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.) filed bar complaints on Friday against Rudy Giuliani and several other attorneys representing the Trump campaign, asking that their law licenses be revoked for having “participated in frivolous lawsuits” and using the courts to “assault public confidence in the United States electoral system.” That may sound good to a lot of people, but legal ethics experts say Pascrell’s complaints won’t go anywhere.
According to Pascrell, the complaints, which seek “the disbarment of Rudolph Giuliani and 22 other lawyers representing Donald Trump in his attempts to overturn the election” were filed with bar authorities in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, New York, and Pennsylvania.
[…]
Following Giuliani’s embarrassing federal court appearance on Tuesday and the Trump campaign legal team’s completely off-the-rails Thursday press conference, public sentiment may be on Pascrell’s side. Attorneys representing Delaware County, Pennsylvania on Friday also filed court documents accusing the former New York City mayor of making the “demonstrably false” claim that election officials “improperly commingled” ballots received before and after Election Day.
But legal ethics experts say Pascrell’s complaint will have little, if any, effect with the bar associations in the aforementioned states.
New York University School of Law professor Stephen Gillers, one of the nation’s foremost experts in regulation of the legal profession, said the disciplinary committees won’t even consider the complaint.
“If a judge were to find that Rudy Giuliani engaged in frivolous conduct in court, the committee might rely on that finding but it will not conduct its own evaluation. Nor will the committee recognize the second allegation as within its jurisdiction. Disciplinary committees nationwide are much more anemic bodies than most people realize,” Gillers told Law&Crime. “This is not to excuse Giuliani’s conduct, which demeans not only him but also the bar, the administration of justice, and our democracy.”
Leslie C. Levin, a law professor and associate dean at the University of Connecticut School of Law, had a similar take. She said these matters are dealt with in court, not by disciplinary committees. Levin said things could get a little dicier for Giuliani, however, if the presiding judge finds that the lawsuits were frivolous.
On one hand, even as someone who has defended lawyers representing Trump on principle, the recent performance of Giuliani, Sidney Powell and other Trump attorneys in public and in court has embarrassed me as a lawyer. Even the resolutely Republican, pro-Trump lawyers at Power Line had to call out the Trump legal team for getting Michigan and Minnesota mixed up in one of its lawsuits.
That said, I wonder if the lawyers cheering Pascrell’s stunt have given a moment’s thought to what would happen if politicians started regularly making Bar complaints against the other team’s attorneys?
There’s a fine line between using gallows humor to deal with a rough situation - having worked as a criminal and family lawyer, I know all about it - and just being a total POS.
A wrongful death lawsuit tied to COVID-19 infections in a Waterloo pork processing plant alleges that during the initial stages of the pandemic, Tyson Foods ordered employees to report for work while supervisors privately wagered money on the number of workers who would be sickened by the deadly virus.
[…]
In mid-April, around the time Black Hawk County Sherriff Tony Thompson visited the plant and reported the working conditions there “shook [him] to the core,” plant manager Tom Hart [allegedly] organized a cash-buy-in, winner-take-all, betting pool for supervisors and managers to wager how many plant employees would test positive for COVID-19.
We need hard scientific evidence on spread in schools. There are many other priorities during a pandemic, but this is too important for too many kids to make decisions based on educated guesses.
Mine are able to homeschool and with the right support, this is a better situation with higher quality learning and social contact in their particular situation (disabilities which were not adequately supported in school due to lack of resources). But for many kids without even basic resources at home (and keeping in mind that the home living situation may also be problematic in poorer families), school gives these kids the education and basic social support that isn’t available for them anywhere else. Taking that away without replacement when there is no clear evidence for or against school community spread may not be the best idea. Therefore, it should be a high public health priority to get solid scientific information and then, if this evidence supports school closures, do what it takes to provide sound alternatives for education and social connection.
The types of people who would callously take bets on others’ lives are always out there. They are merely less noticeable under normal conditions, unless you are the type of person who unwittingly attracts them...ie. socially disadvantaged, disabled or otherwise unable to defend yourself against them.