State border closures illegal under the highest law in the country?

[bigbadbyrnes]

Everything is arguable in law, doubly so in constitutional law. This is a matter for the high court.

But here's my opening argument;

Section 92 of the highest law in the country sets out "On the imposition of uniform duties of customs, trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free. "

Per Cole vs Whitfield 1988 "The notions of absolutely free trade and commerce and absolutely free intercourse are quite distinct". Sec92 clearly sets out the law for interstate trade, but also 'intercourse'.

And on the matter of what intercourse means, per Gratwick v Johnson 1945 it's the ability "to pass to and fro among the States without burden, hindrance or restriction".

Border closures, (and arguably although less certainly isolation requirements), are therefore inconsistent with the highest law in the country and should be set aside.

No one is talking about it, any legal eagles here explain? There's no room on the news for this at the moment, but if people start to fed up with the restrictions, it's worth getting them tested in the high court.

edit:

I think this analysis will answer all your questions: States are shutting their borders to stop coronavirus. Is that actually allowed?

Short version: if there are good public health grounds (for example states of emergency), those laws are likely to be held valid.

Could be worth testing if an individual could be proven to be not a thread to public health, but that would be the exception. Thanks MEL_Traveller for sharing the article.

/thread

 

[kookaburra75]

South Australia, here we come...

South Australia revokes quarantine requirement for ACT travellers, but not for NSW

South Australia will relax its border restrictions with the ACT from midnight tonight — but restrictions on people from New South Wales will remain in place indefinitely.

www.abc.net.au

Now for Tasmania

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

That is status quo for NSW as that is current policy.

Are there any direct services from Canberra? Is there a ‘no transit rule’ for Sydney as there was for Melbourne/Victoria previously?

 

[Pushka]

Are there any direct services from Canberra? Is there a ‘no transit rule’ for Sydney as there was for Melbourne/Victoria previously?

There will be direct services and yes SA people can transit through Sydney without penalty.

 

[Pete98765432]

Are there any direct services from Canberra? Is there a ‘no transit rule’ for Sydney as there was for Melbourne/Victoria previously?

Qantas has direct flights from Canberra to Adelaide on Monday, Thursday & Friday. According to the Canberra Times, Canberrans have to fly direct to SA.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

There will be direct services and yes SA people can transit through Sydney without penalty.

Qantas has direct flights from Canberra to Adelaide on Monday, Thursday & Friday. According to the Canberra Times, Canberrans have to fly direct to SA.

Pete98765432 is right.

It seems one needs to fly direct from Canberra to Adelaide....from news.com.au blog

SA border opens - for some

Those travelling from the ACT to South Australia will be able to enter the state without quarantining from midnight tonight.
However, NSW residents will still be barred from SA for now.
"I am able to advise, effective midnight, the 14-day quarantine period will be lifted for people travelling between South Australia and the ACT," SA Police Commissioner Grant Stevens said this afternoon.
He added the quarantine period would remain fro NSW travellers for "the foreseeable future".
"We're hopeful the situation in NSW will continue to improve … but for the time being people travelling from the ACT, they must travel by air straight from the ACT and not through NSW," he said.
He explained while NSW was "heading in the right direction", infection numbers were still too significant to take the risk.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

So how does that change the situation when not every single person inside a state has been tested?

Asymptomatic people. Perhaps fine if you're mixing with other young folk, but just one of them mixes with someone from a vulnerable group and you can start a serious outbreak.

We saw from New Zealand - covid free - except they weren't.

 

[jakeseven7]

Pete98765432 is right.

It seems one needs to fly direct from Canberra to Adelaide....from news.com.au blog

SA border opens - for some

Those travelling from the ACT to South Australia will be able to enter the state without quarantining from midnight tonight.
However, NSW residents will still be barred from SA for now.
"I am able to advise, effective midnight, the 14-day quarantine period will be lifted for people travelling between South Australia and the ACT," SA Police Commissioner Grant Stevens said this afternoon.
He added the quarantine period would remain fro NSW travellers for "the foreseeable future".
"We're hopeful the situation in NSW will continue to improve … but for the time being people travelling from the ACT, they must travel by air straight from the ACT and not through NSW," he said.
He explained while NSW was "heading in the right direction", infection numbers were still too significant to take the risk.

I'm sure NSW will be thrilled to hear they are judged to be 'heading in the right direction' by SA and QLD.... Wonderful

Did they actually explain when 'too significant' becomes 'tolerable'? Or is it still how the premier/CHO feels that morning?

 

[Pushka]

Pete98765432 is right.

It seems one needs to fly direct from Canberra to Adelaide....from news.com.au blog

SA border opens - for some

Those travelling from the ACT to South Australia will be able to enter the state without quarantining from midnight tonight.
However, NSW residents will still be barred from SA for now.
"I am able to advise, effective midnight, the 14-day quarantine period will be lifted for people travelling between South Australia and the ACT," SA Police Commissioner Grant Stevens said this afternoon.
He added the quarantine period would remain fro NSW travellers for "the foreseeable future".
"We're hopeful the situation in NSW will continue to improve … but for the time being people travelling from the ACT, they must travel by air straight from the ACT and not through NSW," he said.
He explained while NSW was "heading in the right direction", infection numbers were still too significant to take the risk.

Yet a directive was announced in SA the other week that transits in Sydney are acceptable into Adelaide without quarantine. This is why people get confused. This was issued last week before ACT was added. And hasn't been updated yet after this morning.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

Yet a directive was announced in SA the other week that transits in Sydney are acceptable into Adelaide without quarantine. This is why people get confused. This was issued last week before ACT was added.
View attachment 227468

So confusing.....

 

[Pete98765432]

Yet a directive was announced in SA the other week that transits in Sydney are acceptable into Adelaide without quarantine. This is why people get confused. This was issued last week before ACT was added. And hasn't been updated yet after this morning.


View attachment 227468

I guess it’s the second point that’s relevant. Canberrans won’t be originating in WA, Qld, Tas or WA.
There goes the opportunity for extra status credits by flying via Sydney. I’ll be using a flight voucher from a cancelled flight that was booked in the double status credits promotion so hopefully that sticks.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

I guess it’s the second point that’s relevant. Canberrans won’t be originating in WA, Qld, Tas or WA.
There goes the opportunity for extra status credits by flying via Sydney. I’ll be using a flight voucher from a cancelled flight that was booked in the double status credits promotion so hopefully that sticks.

You could do a status run CBR—>ADL (2 weeks) —>BNE/OOL—->SYD —>CBR lol depending on your flight credit try a NT transit lol

 

[Pushka]

I guess it’s the second point that’s relevant. Canberrans won’t be originating in WA, Qld, Tas or WA.
There goes the opportunity for extra status credits by flying via Sydney. I’ll be using a flight voucher from a cancelled flight that was booked in the double status credits promotion so hopefully that sticks.

The website hasnt been updated to accommodate ACT as yet. It still says this:

Travellers from ACT and NSW, other than essential travellers, will be required to:

• self-quarantine for 14 days after entering SA
• submit for COVID-19 testing on:
  • the first day of entry to SA (the day of arrival)
  • the twelfth day of arrival.

 

[jase05]

Marshall is losing his patience I think, especially with Stevens. Hopefully Friday sees better news

 

[Pushka]

Marshall is losing his patience I think, especially with Stevens. Hopefully Friday sees better news

He can withdraw the State of Emergency through Parliament and take advice from Police and Health rather than letting a Police Commissioner and Senior Bureaucrat run the state right now. Enough is enough. We have zero community spread for weeks and no active cases and no unknown transmission cases for months and the last death was April and no active cases for a while. Almost as good as ACT

 

[jakeseven7]

And so the border mess continues.... sigh. What is going to happen next seriously, its ludicrous...

 

[antycbr]

And so the border mess continues.... sigh. What is going to happen next seriously, its ludicrous...

We have to wait for each state, territory and federal government to have gone to an election, apparently.

 

[jakeseven7]

Coronavirus: Where the bloody hell is the court decision on state borders?


The shutting of state borders, for an unprecedented period, costing business billions of dollars, is among the biggest economic, political and constitutional challenges our nation has faced.

Yet the High Court has put off making a decision about the legality of border closures — they might contravene section 92 of the Constitution — until November.

NSW Treasury estimates the state is losing $73m each week in tourism owing to the border closure with Victoria, Queensland about $117m because of its separation from NSW. That’s two borders and one sector. It’s difficult to estimate the total dollar cost of all the border closures, but it’s clearly hundreds of millions of dollars each week in lost income for many thousands of businesses and workers.

And that ignores the heartache from arrests, missed funerals and people being handcuffed in their kitchens or dragged from cars, which doesn’t show up in economic statistics.

Respected economist Saul Eslake, who lives in Tasmania, said he’d refrained from second guessing health advice, as some economists had done.

"States should release the health advice on which they have based their decision to shut borders indefinitely. It’s not as if the coronavirus would change its attack strategy in response to such advice"

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Coronavirus: Where the bloody hell is the court decision on state borders?


The shutting of state borders, for an unprecedented period, costing business billions of dollars, is among the biggest economic, political and constitutional challenges our nation has faced.

Yet the High Court has put off making a decision about the legality of border closures — they might contravene section 92 of the Constitution — until November.

NSW Treasury estimates the state is losing $73m each week in tourism owing to the border closure with Victoria, Queensland about $117m because of its separation from NSW. That’s two borders and one sector. It’s difficult to estimate the total dollar cost of all the border closures, but it’s clearly hundreds of millions of dollars each week in lost income for many thousands of businesses and workers.

And that ignores the heartache from arrests, missed funerals and people being handcuffed in their kitchens or dragged from cars, which doesn’t show up in economic statistics.

Respected economist Saul Eslake, who lives in Tasmania, said he’d refrained from second guessing health advice, as some economists had done.

"States should release the health advice on which they have based their decision to shut borders indefinitely. It’s not as if the coronavirus would change its attack strategy in response to such advice"

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

The High Court decision won’t be on economic grounds. It will be on health grounds.

big business and social media ‘influencers’ don’t really have much standing it seems.

 

[Pushka]

The High Court decision won’t be on economic grounds. It will be on health grounds.

big business and social media ‘influencers’ don’t really have much standing it seems.

And currently, if Australia was in this space we are currently in, back in April, there would be no cause for border closures.

I am longing for the day we are once again

(geez what is with the round flag?)

 

[antycbr]

The High Court decision won’t be on economic grounds. It will be on health grounds.

big business and social media ‘influencers’ don’t really have much standing it seems.

It should be on Constitutional grounds.

Nothing more, nothing less.

That is the role of the High Court.