in

The TC considers declaring unconstitutional the confinement of the first state of alarm: what are its consequences?

Lockdown. (Photo: .)

A year has passed since the confinement decreed by the Government during the months of March, April and May 2020 ended, and now, the Constitutional Court (TC) could declare it unconstitutional. Over two days, the 11 members of the high court have debated whether, under the umbrella of the state of alarm, fundamental rights were limited or, on the contrary, they were suspended – for which they should have chosen to declare a state of emergency -.

Despite the fact that the criteria of magistrate Pedro Trevijano – from the conservative sector of the TC -, in charge of drafting the draft that had to be put to a vote, leaned towards this last option, finally the Constitutional Court has not reached any agreement when there is a tie with five votes in favor and five against. The decision will be postponed until July, now opening a period of reflection.

The possible unconstitutionality of the decree poses an uncertain scenario and, above all, opens an unknown in relation to the sanctions imposed during that period. The reason for its examination at this point responds to a Vox appeal in which it was denounced, precisely, that article 7 of the decree of the state of alarm – regulating the entry and exit of the home – supposed a suspension of rights of free movement and residence, set forth in article 19 of the Constitution, that is, a “disguised” state of exception

Article 19

Spaniards have the right to freely choose their residence and circulate throughout the national territory. Likewise, they have the right to freely enter and leave Spain under the terms established by law. This right may not be limited for political or ideological reasons.

While …

This article originally appeared on The HuffPost and has been updated.

Lupillo Rivera apologizes to Belinda – Las Noticias de Chihuahua – Entrelíneas

Nashville SC and Montreal Impact split points after drawing 1-1