California Emergency Services Act: emergency powers: limitation.
If enacted, SB 448 would alter the way emergency authorities are exercised in California. The bill asserts that emergency orders cannot infringe upon specific constitutional rights and outlines that such orders should have predetermined expiration periods. For instance, an emergency order that infringes on constitutional rights would expire within 30 days if the legislature is in session, or within seven days in other cases, preventing lingering restrictions on individual liberties. It would create a more structured and accountable process for declaring emergencies and enforcing regulations during such events.
Senate Bill 448, known as the Emergency Power Limitation Act, seeks to impose significant restrictions on the powers of state and local officials, particularly the Governor, during states of emergency. The bill mandates that any emergency order issued must be narrowly tailored to address a compelling public health or safety need and should have specified limitations in duration, applicability, and scope. Furthermore, it establishes a framework for judicial review, allowing individuals to challenge the legality of emergency orders that they believe infringe upon their constitutional rights in a significant manner.
The main points of contention surrounding SB 448 revolve around the balance between public safety and individual rights. Supporters argue that it is essential to protect civil liberties during emergencies, while opponents may express concerns that applying stringent limitations on emergency powers could hinder rapid responses to urgent public health crises. The bill also asserts that safeguarding residents' liberties during emergencies is a statewide concern, thereby applying uniformly across all cities, which may encounter resistance from local governments that prefer flexibility in managing local emergencies.