The matter is with the high court. Have they actually said the issue will be decided on health evidence? It may not even get to that. It could be as simple as ‘is there a valid state of emergency in existence?’ If yes, then the border closure is not unconstitutional.So what you are saying is that the States should have appealed to the High Court to close their borders as the constitution says they should remain open to all Australian citizens.I would agree with that.
Your statement that i replied to was this.
So what evidence do the State Premiers quote when defending the border closures- expert health advice.So an epidemiologist is such an expert.
And once again the advice of the Commonwealth,NSW and Victorian health officials has been don't close the State borders.
Besides the matter is with the High court and will be decided on both the law and the health evidence.
Delving into the decision making of each state cabinet may not be something the courts want to get in to.
State premiers don’t need to rely on advice from a doctor. They can look at it from a policy and operational angle. What is happening at a federal level (forced quarantine, citizens banned from leaving). They could look at what’s happened in other countries. The epidemiologist may provide input, but decisions of cabinet or the executive branch aren't required to be based on a single source.