1. Looking at the arguments surrounding mass COVID-19 testing
2. SCOTUS has issued the same number of opinions as this time last year
3. Federal agency blocks Washington crude oil transportation law

Looking at the arguments for and against mass COVID-19 testing

On Friday, stay-at-home orders expired in five states—Arizona, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, and Vermont. One more is expiring today in Massachusetts. This brings the total number of expired orders to 24. More than half of the 43 states that originally issued statewide stay-at-home orders have seen them expire. 51% of the population lives in states with stay-at-home orders (166.7 million), and 49% of the population (160.9 million) live in states without. Of the states with stay-at-home orders, 17 have Democratic governors, and two have Republican governors (New Hampshire, Ohio).

Four states—California, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Oregon—are currently under indefinite stay-at-home orders. One of the major areas of debate around when states should end COVID-related stay-at-home orders concerns the prevalence of widespread coronavirus testing. Here’s a brief overview of some of the arguments for and against such testing:

• Proponents of universal or mass testing for COVID-19 before ending stay-at-home orders argue universal testing is necessary to avoid a second wave of infection. Also, proponents believe universal testing will increase confidence among the populace about the safety of a reopened economy.

• Opponents of universal or mass testing before ending stay-at-home orders argue that representative samples of a population can provide sufficient information about the prevalence of the disease. Those people also say that over-relying on tests, which can produce false negatives, might give a false sense of security.

Click here for our full taxonomy of the main arguments that have been advanced concerning universal or mass testing for COVID-19.

Reopenings today

Here’s a sampling of what are states reopening today and where stay-at-home orders are expiring. A more complete listing can be found in Friday's edition of our Documenting America's Path to Recovery newsletter or by reviewing our page on reopening plans here:

• At a press conference on May 15, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) said Florida (Republican trifecta) would enter “full phase one” today. This means gyms will be allowed to reopen with social distancing guidelines, restaurants can operate at 50% capacity (up from 25%), and museums and libraries may operate at 50% capacity.
• On May 14, Gov. Laura Kelly (D) announced Phase 1.5 of Kansas' (divided government) reopening. Effective today, the following businesses will be permitted to reopen: personal service businesses by appointment only (e.g., nail salons, barber shops, and tattoo parlors) and gyms and fitness centers. Gatherings of more than 10 people remain prohibited.
• In Kentucky (divided government), government offices will be permitted to reopen.
• Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R) said he will announce whether he will extend or lift the state’s stay-at-home order today.
• In Missouri (Republican trifecta), state park campgrounds will begin reopening today. Reservations will be required. State park beaches will also open to the public on May 21.
• In New Hampshire (divided government), outdoor dining at restaurants will be permitted under Gov. Chris Sununu’s “Stay-at-Home 2.0” order, with social distancing and hygiene measures for employees and the public.
• Rhode Island (Democratic trifecta) businesses that are open in the state have until today to develop a written COVID-19 Control Plan detailing precautions they have taken to prevent the spread of the virus.
• Gyms, office spaces, and non-essential manufacturing businesses in Texas (Republican trifecta) can reopen at or below 25% capacity as part of the next phase of the state’s reopening plan.
• Non-essential retail businesses in Vermont (divided government) can reopen today at or below 25% capacity. Employees must wear masks. On May 15, Gov. Phil Scott (R) announced he was replacing the state’s stay-at-home order with a “Stay Smart, Stay Safe” order.

Here are some other notable coronavirus-related updates since Friday’s Brew:

• The House of Representatives passed a $3 trillion coronavirus relief package and sent it to the U.S. Senate for consideration. It was approved 208-199 with 23 not voting.
• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued reopening guidelines for businesses and workplaces, including bars and restaurants.
• Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) extended New York's stay-at-home order through May 28 for regions, including New York City, that do not meet the state’s reopening criteria. Five regions that met the criteria can reopen some nonessential businesses.
• The statewide school closure in Wyoming ended Friday. Decisions on reopening will be left up to individual districts. Schools in the state had been closed to in-person instruction since March 23.
• Iowa's state legislature extended its suspension through June 3.

Learn more

       

---

SCOTUS has issued the same number of opinions as this time last year

The coronavirus pandemic has affected all levels of courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. These effects include closing state and local courtrooms, postponing jury trials, and conducting proceedings remotely.

Beginning last month, we listened as SCOTUS heard live-streamed arguments via telephone conference for the first time in its history. So I figured this was a good time to take a look at where the court’s 2019-2020 term stands today.

• The court has issued 32 decisions this term—the same as this time last term.
• The court has agreed to hear 74 cases. 
• The court has been closed to the public for 67 days due to the coronavirus.
• The court postponed 20 hours of oral argument originally scheduled during its March and April sittings. It rescheduled 10 hours of argument, which it heard via teleconference in May.
• The court heard 13 cases via teleconference in the 10 hours of argument during its May sitting.
• Thirteen cases remain unscheduled for argument. In the Court's previous term, the justices completed hearing oral argument for all cases on April 24, 2019.
• So far, the court released the most (11) opinions this term in April.
• Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has written the most (five) opinions this term. 

Click here to sign up for our Bold Justice newsletter, the most in-depth coverage of federal courts available.

Federal agency blocks Washington crude oil transportation law

Preemption has been a regular topic of debate lately as governments address the coronavirus outbreak. Preemption occurs when legislation at a higher level of government is used to overrule authority at a lower one. For example, in September and October 2016, respectively, Nashville and Memphis approved ordinances allowing city police to issue $50 fines for possession of half an ounce or less of marijuana instead of criminal penalties. Then in 2017, Gov. Bill Haslam (R) signed a law repealing the two cities’ ordinances. 

Here at Ballotpedia, we’ve been covering the issue of preemption for years, with articles on 11 policy topics. I want to highlight a recent preemption story concerning crude oil transportation.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)— the federal agency tasked with regulating the transportation of oil and other hazardous materials—issued an order May 11 blocking a Washington state law that would have placed restrictions on crude oil transportation beyond those required by federal law.

The Washington state law, passed in 2019, set vapor pressure limits on crude oil transported by rail with the goal of minimizing the explosion risk in the event of a train accident. Washington has been a Democratic trifecta since 2017.

The PHMSA held that the state law did not conform to the U.S. Hazardous Materials Regulations and could disrupt the nationwide implementation of the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law by encouraging other states to set their own vapor pressure requirements. The PHMSA also cited a Sandia National Laboratories study to support its determination that Washington state’s vapor pressure requirement would not reduce the risk of explosions.

Washington state can submit a petition for judicial review of the PHMSA’s order to a federal court of appeals within 60 days.

Ballotpedia depends on the support of our readers.

The Lucy Burns Institute, publisher of Ballotpedia, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. All donations are tax deductible to the extent of the law. Donations to the Lucy Burns Institute or Ballotpedia do not support any candidates or campaigns.