Barr's threat is notably vague on legal details, but at first blush it seems **possibly** more modest than some initial reactions suggest. (Julian's normative point here is unassailable; I'm speaking only to legal theory.) 1/ https://twitter.com/normative/status/1252672221480353793

Barr *seems* to be talking about filing statements of interest in existing civil suits by private parties: "If [DOJ] believes a governor has 'gone too far' and is sued as a result, then 'we file a statement of interest and side with the plaintiffs'" 2/ https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/barr-open-doj-going-after-governors-stay-at-home-orders-too-far

There's obvious resource implications, so it's not hard to imagine cases where this could make a real practical difference. But it's not obvious it would entail the claim of an *independent* legal right to stop shutdowns that private parties couldn't already raise. 3/

which is I think where our spitballing conversation last week landed in this thread--i.e., AG filing claims *in court* to enforce DCC--though I'd be interested in takes from others on whether that seems right. (Again stipulating reporting is sketchy.) 4/4 https://twitter.com/petermshane/status/1250442865030938624?s=20