- And here with us nowas more and more states

adopt stay-at-home measuresis Charles "Cully" Stimson,

senior legal fellow and managerat The Heritage Foundation.

Cully, thanks for joining us.

So talk to us about whatstates and local authorities

are doing to make surepeople stay at home.

- Yeah, so the states undertheir state constitutions

have ample legal authoritythrough their governor

to issue suggestions, whichwe've seen in the beginning,

to stay at home, wash your hands,

not be in groups of 10 ormore, and things like that,

to now executive orders,which have the force of law

across the country in the very states

where the governors have done this,

which can be not onlyenforced by using the police

to enforce it, just a show of presence,

or arresting people, finingpeople, jailing people

if necessary, and we hopeit doesn't come to that.

But they are allowed todo that, and in fact,

it's the governor's promiseto take care of the health,

and safety of the citizens.

It's not the federalgovernment's job to do that

under the constitution.

- And so how much can they enforce

these stay-at-home measures?

You know you mentioned the police,

and people out an aboutkind of patrolling,

but how much, I guess, how realistic is it

that they would actuallyenforce these measures?

- Well, I think mostpeople are just gonna do

what they're told to do,

because they wanna besocially responsible people.

But there are gonna be a few people

who are going to ignore these rules,

and I think it's those people

that the governors arerightfully targeting,

and the police will rightfully warn

and then sternly warn,and they give a fine to,

and if ultimately necessary, jail.

Remember, back in 1905, theSupreme Court issued a decision

called Jacobson against Massachusets,

which held the proposition

that you could be forciblyvaccinated against your will,

that for the small pox vaccine,

and that was entirely withinstate authority to do that,

so they certainly, in this context,

can arrest people if theyviolate the governors' orders.

- Yeah, and what about testing?

Do state and localauthorities have the authority

to make people get tested for covid-19?

- They do.

Now, I have not seen anystate executive orders

by governors that haveultimately demanded that yet,

but we could see that.

I think for the most part,

people wanna see this virus go away,

they want their loved onesand families to be protected,

they're gonna do what'sright by their family.

I mean the bedrock principalof society is the family,

so people are gonnaprotect their families.

I'm doing that for mine,so are my neighbors.

So we're talking abouta small sliver of people

who simply, for whatever reason,

wanna violate these commonsense, temporary orders,

so that the virus is suppressed.

- Yeah, you know, in placeslike Italy, and China,

and these other places, we'veseen them go to martial law.

Do you think we could see thathere in the United States?

- I doubt it.

Look, we have a differentgovernmental structure

than our brothers and sisters in Europe.

We are a federal republic, so the state's,

the 50 individual sovereignsare their own sovereigns,

and they're run by a governor,

who's the chief executive of the state.

The federal government oversees that,

but we have a separatIon of powers

between federal and state,so could the state governors

call up their national guard?

Sure, they do that all the time

for natural disastersand things like that.

Could they use their national guard

to enforce those quarantine orders?

They could, although the policeseem to be sufficing now.

Can we envision a scenario

where the president of the United States,

the commander in chief, isgonna call in the US military

to enforce a national quarantine?

I don't think we're gonnaget there, not even close.

- All right, Cully Stimsonwith The Heritage Foundation,

we appreciate your expertise,and for being with us today.

Thank you.