That so few are even asking this question in insane to me.

Plenty of people are asking, Tesla has already brought a declaratory action in the courts to ask them.

The thing is that is how things are done legally, but Musk is putting the cart before the horse by breaking the order. In other words right or wrong say police show up to enforce the order and order the factory shutdown and musk/employees fail to obey...failing to obey the officers orders in generally a charge unto itself at that point never mind the violation of the county order.

I'm guessing that it needs to be tested in court.

Or at least, that Musk has decided that it does.

That's because people who actually care rather than feigning curiosity can read the order, which cites its statutory authority, and then can go and read the statutory authority, too.

People who actually care can drill down into the appropriate codes and see that your derisive tone is wholly unsupported by fact.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23164535

You have an ugly habit of trying to silence critique by talking down to people using specific claims and relying on their inability to research when it is your claims that are false.

> People who actually care can drill down into the appropriate codes and see that your derisive tone is wholly unsupported by fact.

> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23164535

I've responded directly to that post with direct links to the relevant orders, but it's funny that you make that claim and point to a post (of yours, I note) that is both derisive in tone and almost wholly unsupported by fact (making a claim that is both literally false and which refers to a set of state orders that isn't, and doesn't include, the only state order relevant to the discussion, the shelter-in-place order issued by the Director of Public Health.)

  I've responded directly to that post with direct links to the relevant orders

You're talking in circles. The point here is that you repeatedly said that Newsome's orders cites criminal statute law, e.g.

  "...the order, which cites its statutory authority (to shut down Tesla et al)"

And it doesn't. You can keep pretending that it does and telling people who tried to point that out in a courteous way to, in effect, "go look it up", but I did, and I quoted same. (Feel free to quote any supporting criminal statutes now, which you've been oddly reluctant to do.)

And today's Wisconsin Supreme Court overturn of its Governor's shelter in place order clearly demonstrates that even a Governor can't exceed his authority, even if s/he thinks it well-intentioned.

> The point here is that you repeatedly said that Newsome's orders cites criminal statute law

Nope, I never said any of Newsom's orders did that; I said the state and, relevant here, Alameda County public health orders (neither of which was issued by Newsom) both cited the relevant statutory authority to criminal enforcement. I've even linked directly to both orders and reproduced the citations from both orders, and even pulled out and quoted the most relevant section from a broad chapter cited in the county order. You, on the other hand, have made an inaccurate description of the authority cited in the irrelevant governor's executive orders to support the rest of your unsupported inaccurate claims.

Newsom's 39 executive orders on this emergency (at last count, which was yesterday so I might have missed a couple) are waivers of state law under the governor's emergency powers which are separate from the public health orders that are at issue here. (They are only tangentially relevant in that one of them provides the authority for the 5/7/2020 revision to the State Public Health Order bypassing some usual procedural requirements.)

> And today's Wisconsin Supreme Court overturn of its Governor's shelter in place order clearly demonstrates that even a Governor can't exceed his authority, even if s/he thinks it well-intentioned.

That point was never in dispute, but sure.

Almost all US case law has held that any jurisdiction can make anything illegal unless there's a specific higher-ranking (state or federal) law protecting that act from being made illegal.

Even without any supporting statute law?

There is supporting state statute law for public health orders to prevent communicable disease; that statute law is also what makes it a crime to violate such orders.

Okay, which Code and which Section for CA?

I'll just quote the first part (after the rather extended title) of the Alameda County order, which cites the statutory authority both for the order itself and for criminal prosecution of violations:

> Please read this Order carefully. Violation of or failure to comply with this Order is a misdemeanor punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both. (California Health and Safety Code § 120295, et seq.; Cal. Penal Code §§ 69, 148(a)(1))

> UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 101040, 101085, AND 120175, THE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA (“HEALTH OFFICER”) ORDERS: